Greetings from the French Hill

Can't Focus On The Politics

2008-08-27T08:41:00.004+03:00

I was going to write about some thoughts on the Presidential election currently going on in the States, but I find that I can't complete what I want to write. I just can't write about anything political right now. Oh, don't get me wrong. I have opinions about what's happening and the candidates, but I just don't feel like putting thought to digital paper at the moment.

So, let's talk about something else in the meantime. I want to talk to all the mothers out there. I want to talk to both those that have been courageous enough to work and take care of their children, and those that have been brave enough to make taking care of your home your full time job.

I want to know your experiences. I want to know if you share the same dilemmas as I do. For those of you who also work outside the home, do you feel any guilt for being away from your child? Do you have any regrets? Do you feel the tear within yourself that you have to be everywhere at once, 100% dedicated at work and 100% dedicated at home? Do you feel the struggle within, wondering if it's all worth it?

For those of you at home, do you regret giving up a career or the prospects of a career? Do you feel at all unfulfilled? Do you sometimes feel unappreciated, as if the job you're doing isn't as important simply because you don't get paid to do it? Do you feel trapped sometimes?

The reason I ask is because I realize that as I settle more into motherhood, those types of questions travel across my brain at one point or another during the day or during the week. It's a roller coaster of inner fighting and conflict that a man can never understand. It's the constant struggle for balance between nurturing and caring for one's young and achieving some form of inner happiness and self fulfillment that is outside of simply being a mom. Of course, I use the word "simple", and I left. There is nothing simple about being a mom. You are raising the future. What can be simple about that? There's a reason in Judaism that it while it is on the father to ensure a child's education, the burden of education and teaching a child the way's of G-d fall to the mother. She chooses what kind of education a child receives in the home, for that is her domain. She has the instincts for what her child needs.

I'll give you an example. Last night, my baby woke up screaming bloody murder a couple of hours after we put him to sleep. He normally does not wake up like this so soon after we put him down. My husband and I immediately knew something was wrong. We tried changing his diaper. That wasn't the problem. We figured maybe he got bit by a mosquito or something, and it got a nerve. However, after about half a minute, I realized instinctively that he was hungry. Now, he had just eaten a couple of hours before, and it's rare for him to be hungry again until morning. But, somehow, through his crying and just instinctively I knew that was the problem. My husband wasn't so sure, so I gave in and agree to try other things to try and calm him down. I allowed this for about 5 minutes and then just said that I was going to try feeding him. Sure enough. That was the problem. After feeding him, he fell right back asleep and slept soundly until morning.

Before you become a mom, your mom, grandmother, aunt, etc. tells you that you have the instincts to be a good mom. You just have to trust them. While you're pregnant, you don't really believe them. I know I didn't "feel" like a mom yet, and I was scared to death that I didn't inherit that mom gene. When I gave birth and for the first 4 weeks, I also didn't feel it. I was scared out of my mind. I didn't know what to do when he cried. I didn't know how I should calm him down. I started doubting myself. That was the key to unlocking my success. Once I started say to myself not to be afraid of his crying, that was he trying to communicate with me, and that I know how to deal with what he's trying to say, things started settling down.

All of a sudden, I saw that I could calm him down when he was sad. I just had to listen to him. I could take care of him by myself when family wasn't around, and my husband was at work. It was a liberating feeling to be able to allow myself the confidence to listen to what my son had to say and be able to provide him with what he actually wanted. It feels like such a gift, but then again, what about me? What about my wants and needs? How do I fulfill myself and still be 100% invested as a mom? Do I have to constantly be sacrificing something? Or is there some sort of balance out there somewhere?

From all you moms out there, I would really like to know what you have to say on the matter.

Technorati Tags: Mom, Baby, Politics, Work, Stay-at-home, Motherhood, Birth

What User Agreement?

2008-08-22T12:27:00.002+03:00

I just heard a very interesting story on NPR. No, I don't listen to it on a regular basis or anything like that. I use it for my job. They were discussing how storing our information, pictures, emails, vital documents, etc. in the "cloud", the term to describe storage in cyber space, is more and more becoming the norm and will be the common wave of the future. However, as this is happening, the majority of us out their using these online services really don't know what we've signed up, what our rights are, etc. b/c none of us have really read the user agreements that we agree in order to become members.

Take email, for example. If someone out there is a vindictive prick who's out to wreak petty yet powerful vengeance on you, they can write to your email provider and claim, without any proof necessary, that you have illegal content in your email box, or that you're using your email account for illegal practices. Again, no proof is required to verify this accusation. Unless you're some hot shot client, it takes more time, money, and resources than is worth it in order to investigate the charges. Instead, the email provider will more than likely just shut down your email account without warning. Yes, they can do that. Goodbye to all your emails. Adios to all your information you've been saving. Shalom and L'hitraot to all those important documents. What? You didn't know they can do that? But, it says so right there in the User Agreement.

An example of this happened to me last year. As most of my readers will know, during the war in 2006, I produced a number of short picture films set to music. I posted them on YouTube and then embedded them here. About a year or so after I posted them, I was emailed by some readers that the videos were no longer working. I went into YouTube to get into my account, but my password didn't work. I wrote to YouTube to find out what was going on. They wrote back to me saying that my account had been terminated due to violations of the terms of service. They didn't give any further explanation as to what violations I had supposedly violated. What I suspect happened was that some pro-Palestinian or pro-Hezbollah jerks complained about the content of my videos. So, without warning or explanation, my account was simply terminated without my knowledge.

As I'm even sitting here writing this, I'm completely aware that one day, some same Pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel, liberal jerk off can come to this site, not like what I'm writing, declare that free speech is only for those that agree with his opinion, write to Google, complain about me, and my blog could be gone. No explanation needed. All that stuff I wrote vanished. And Google could do it too. It's in that User Agreement I clicked the "I Agree" box for.

But, will I back all my writings up? Eh, probably not. It's human nature. That's why we're using the cloud more and more to store our information. It's easier. It's quicker, and it's always there when we need it. Of course, until it not...

Technorati Tags: Computer, Information, Cloud, Google, YouTube, War, Pro-Palestinian, Anti-Israel, Liberal, User, Agreement

Fuzzy Wuzzy Was A Bear

2008-08-21T11:56:00.003+03:00

You know, one of the things that everyone, who's a parent, talks about when you're pregnant for the first time and about to become a first-time parent is get ready to basically never sleep again. They try to explain the fatigue, but it always comes out in a joking matter that you don't know how seriously you should take them. And on top of that, you think to yourself, well, they don't look that tired. On top of that, you basically delude yourself. If you comprehended the enormity of what was really in store for you as a parent, I think the human species would probably go extinct pretty darn quickly. We're all, especially women, sado-masochists in that way. Normally, people who choose to put themselves through pain and agony are diagnosed with a psychosis and sometimes even put in a mental institution and on heavy anti-psychotic medications. But, no. Purposely going through the pain of morning sickness, back aches, stretch marks, swollen feet, etc., and then the pain of child birth is considered perfectly normal. More than that, doing it more than once, after figuring out what you're in for, is considered even more normal!!

In any case, what nobody can or does prepare you for is just the utter physical and mental dizzying exhaustion that comes with being a parent, and especially being a mother. My brain has felt like it's been stuffed with cotton balls since the second my son came out of me. My brain is just mush. I am just completely drained of any mental energy. I doubt if I could tell you what 2 + 2 is right now. 5? It's not that I am not enjoying motherhood. I love it. I love watching my son grow, I take such pleasure in seeing every new thing he does and discovers. My biggest joy is seeing that he smiles the biggest and laughs the hardest for me, his mom.

I just wish I could hold a coherent thought in my head for more than a few seconds, and I wish that I didn't feel like I needed to collapse at 8:00 at night after he's put to bed. I used to be such a night owl. If I went to bed before midnight, then I must have been sick or something. But now, I'm lucky if I can make to 11:00. What's happened to me? It's not like I'm not sleeping. Thank god, bli eyin hara, my son sleeps well at night. I'm getting sleep, but I still just feel so exhausted!

Man, taking care of a kid is such exhausting work! I don't even drink coffee! How am I going to survive???

Technorati Tags: Birth, Pregnancy, Pregnant, Sleep, Baby

Jaded

2008-08-20T16:09:00.003+03:00

I don't have any clue if there's anyone out there who still reads my blog, but for those 1 or 3 of you out there that may still reading, you should know that I'm back in town, electronically speaking. I've been gone for quite a while now. There are many reasons for it, personally and politically.

Let's start with the personal first. I had my first child a little over 4 months ago. For all of you who have children out there, I don't have to tell you that trying to blog while taking care of a newborn is a bit difficult. By the time the little one gets to sleep, I'm just utterly spent and exhausted that writing anything coherent would be an immense challenge. Even writing now, I'm making so many spelling mistakes out of sheer fatigue that I'm wondering if it's even worth it. But, I have a need and desire to write again. While I was pregnant, I just didn't have that. I just really needed a break.

Secondly, the political factor. Anyone who's ever read my blog knows that I love to discuss politics, especially Israeli politics. However, for the past like 8 months or so, I've just been completely jaded about everything that's been going on here. It's just disgusted me to the point that I just couldn't write about that disgust. It's also gotten to the point where I just stopped watching the news or really even caring about what was going on in the country I live in. I mean, what was the point? We have a disgustingly corrupt government, led by a man who would sell his own mother to stay in power for one more hour, a man that is literally selling his country down the river.

My father-in-law likes to say, "One day, the Jews will have a country of their own." Israel is a country in peril that is sacrificing itself for a meager scrap of favorable public opinion in the world, a world that secretly, and mostly not so secretly, wishes they hadn't stopped Hitler from completing his work. Israel is a country that has no belief or fortitude in the concept of its own sovereignty. It is a country that still believes and acts like we are a people still living in exile under foreign rule that have to behave and do what we're told lest we suffer the wrath of another's dominance. We are living in dhimmitude even though we now have the guns, we now have the missiles, we now have power.

In any case, hopefully things will be different now. I may stay away from writing about politics while my feelings are like this. I feel that I want to shift to talking about other things, as well as about Middle East politics. It's a new blog, and it's a new day. I just hope there's somebody out there that wants to listen, or read actually, what I have to say.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Birth, Baby, Newborn

So, What Else Is New?

2007-12-03T15:24:00.000+02:00

Palestinian police behind last week's terror attack
Yaakov Katz , THE JERUSALEM POST Dec. 2, 2007

Palestinian policemen were behind the shooting attack last week which killed Ido Zoldan, a 29-year-old father of two from the settlement of Shavei Shomron, the IDF and Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) revealed Sunday night.

Zoldan was killed last Monday night - the day before the Annapolis summit began - when shots were fired at his car as he drove past the Palestinian village of al-Punduk.

The three members of the cell were Palestinian policemen and members of the Palestinian National Security Force, in which Israel and the United States have been investing as part of the international effort to strengthen Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah government.

Defense officials said the weapon used in the attack had not been supplied to the Palestinians by Israel since it did not belong to the official Palestinian security forces. The officials said, however, that the IDF expected the political echelon to rethink its policy of strengthening Abbas in light of the fact that his policemen were involved in terrorism.

The day after the attack, acting on intelligence, IDF soldiers and Shin Bet operatives raided the village of Kfar Kadum, near al-Pundak and arrested Daper Barham and Abdullah Barahm, both 22-year-old Palestinian policemen and Fatah members. The third suspect, Fadi Jama, also a policeman, was in Palestinian Police custody.

During their interrogation, the two confessed their involvement in the attack and handed over the weapon used in the shooting to the Shin Bet. They said they had parked their car on the side of the road and waited for an Israeli car to pass by. Once Zoldan's car appeared, they merged onto the road, passed him, and opened fire. They told their interrogators that they decided to carry out the attack to "scare settlers."

Technorati Tags: Israel, Annapolis, Abbas, Abu+Mazen, Zoldan, Fatah, Palestinian, Terror, Terrorist

3 Minutes= 2,000 Years of Waiting & Anguish

2007-11-30T12:14:00.000+02:00

Olmert Gives The Finger To World Jewry

2007-11-28T16:18:00.000+02:00

Now, there are many times when I feel that non-Israeli Jews have no right to talk about Israeli policy. This is not one of those times. In response to American Jewish leaders concerns and objections over Olmert's plans to put the discussion of dividing Jerusalem on the table of any peace talks, he had this to say:

(Source: Arutz 7)
Olmert to U.S. Jews: Jerusalem None of Your Business

(IsraelNN.com) Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said on Monday that the issue of Jerusalem is an Israeli issue and not a "Jewish issue." He made the statement as delegates from the Orthodox Union (OU) and pro-Israel Christians met with American National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley to express opposition to plans by the Olmert administration to divide the Jewish capital with the Palestinian Authority (PA).

The OU replied that it was not trying to dictate policy to Israel but added that Jews throughout the world have a share in "the holy city of Jerusalem."

OK, Olmert must be on a crusade to burn every bridge and destroy any semblance of remaining support he has with the Jewish world. Maybe he's lobbying for a job with the Arabs. Who knows! But, is he kidding us with this stuff?!? I've given up questioning his moves or being surprised by anything that comes out of his mouth. They're all stupid, but this must take the cake!!

Why is Jerusalem such an important and volatile issue to every Jew on the face of the planet? Should I give those of you that have been living under a rock for the past 5,000+ years a short history lesson?!? Apparently, Olmert needs it. Without insulting any of your intelligence, let's leave it with one simple declaration:
Jerusalem is the single most important site in Judaism. We pray in its direction 3 times a day. On holidays, we declare, "Next Year in Jerusalem!" We actually don't say, Next year in Israel. We believe that G-d's essence resides over the city. What more do I need to add? Want me to stray away a bit from religion? Fine, Zionistically speaking, the movement for Jews to have the same self-determination as any other people is even named after one of Jerusalem's alternative names: ZION!! The whole goal is to return to Jerusalem. Hey, Olmert, heard our national anthem lately?

Olmert has officially reached rock bottom in order to justify his actions to stay in office one day longer. All I can say is pray...

Technorati Tags: Israel, Jew, Jewish, Olmert, Annapolis, Jerusalem, Judaism, Zion

Bush In Business of Creating Terror State & Destroying Them

2007-11-27T20:35:00.000+02:00

At the start of the much heralded Annapolis "Peace" Conference, President Bush made a couple of statements that shows that his post-9/11 policy of destroying terror states has officially been sacrificed in search of the hallowed pursuit that has been plaguing every President and Western leader since May 14th, 1948 when Israel was created: Bringing peace to the Middle East. Of course, when I say Middle East, I mean between Israel and the Palestinians. Although, every Western leader has the insane and counter-intuitive notion that bringing peace between Israel and the Palestinians will magically restore peace to the entire region.

How do I know that President Bush is willing to forgo his entire Presidential legacy of fighting Islamic extremism? Firstly, in a joint statement between him, Olmert, and Abbas, they stated that they are committed, and see it as completely possible and realistic, to reaching a new peace deal by the end of 2008. We all know that President Bush's reign will end in January of 2009. Making a statement that he will commit the last 14 months of his presidency to getting signatures committed to paper shows that in lieu of all common sense and reason, President Bush is aiming for another Tabba and Camp David agreement. Only this time, he believes he will succeed where President Clinton went wrong. He believes he'll get the Palestinians to say yes where Arafat said no. He believes this can be achieved with the weakest leader in Israeli history, Olmert, and the man that couldn't command his own pants to stay on his legs, Abu Mazen. But, the goal of achieving "peace" is more important than reality. It always has been. It makes rational and brilliant men and women turn into complete zombies of idiocy.

Secondly, President Bush is calling for the creation of a Palestinian state at a time when the people are at its lowest desire to live in peace with Israel. He says now is the right time, more so than ever, for a creation of a viable FREE Palestinian state. By his very words, President Bush is stating that before he leaves office, he is going to everything in his power, short of donating the shirt of his own back, to creating a Terrorist State next to one of the United States' strongest allies. Let me make this clearer. While thousands of U.S. troops have died in the fight to bring an end to Terror States in Afghanistan and Iraq, President Bush is actively attempting to create another Terror State in Palestine. So, his whole speech about destroying all Terror States and those States that harbor terrorists does not apply to the one entity that clearly aims to not only destroy Israel but to assist in destroying America and American interests. It's clear to anyone with eyes, and even the blind could see this, that the ones truly in charge of the Palestinians are the terrorist organization, and the vast majority of the Palestinian people are totally FINE with this. Not only are they fine with it, but they want more of Hamas! But, in the name of "peace", President Bush is willing to overlook these tiny little details and sacrifice Israel for the sake of his legacy and for the sake of erasing the mess he's created in Iraq; a mess that now finally being cleaned up.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict seems to be the only issue that makes the West travel through the looking glass into a world of make believe, where the Israelis are the bad guys and the Palestinians really want sunshine and co-existence.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Palestinian, Bush, Annapolis, Peace, Conference, Olmert, Abbas, Abu+Mazen, Hamas, Terror, America, West

Let The Peace Begin!!

2007-11-25T16:37:00.000+02:00

As I've said, this whole Annapolis "Peace" Conference is a bit frustrating. Today, we see one of the reasons why. Ahead of this sham in Maryland, Israel's security is on the highest alert it can be. Every terrorist organization, including the savior of peace, Abu Mazen's own "moderate" Fatah party, is stepping up its attempts to carry out massive carnage against the Israeli population.

Because of the extremely heightened security alerts, just about every American Yeshiva and Seminary has put its school on lock-down. No student is allowed to travel around Jerusalem or Tel Aviv until further notice. I don't know if I 100% agree with that decision, but I understand the schools' caution.

I, for one, am waiting with baited breath for our esteemed Prime Minister Olmert to return from Maryland and declaring that he has achieved "peace in our time". As is usually the case, the Arabs can't destroy Israel and the Jews. The ones that do the best job of destroying the Jewish people is the Jewish people themselves.

Technorati Tags: Annapolis, Jerusalem, Tel, Aviv, Terror, Terrorist, Abu+Mazen, Fatah, Maryland

Happy Turkey Day!!

2007-11-22T23:50:00.000+02:00

There are many things to be thankful for, not just today but everyday. So, I won't go through the list because it would truly be endless. So, let's just say I'm thankful.

HAPPY THANKSGIVING EVERYONE!!!

Frustration

2007-11-20T14:55:00.000+02:00

I'm sure the 20 or so of who you read my blog on an even semi-regular basis have noticed my absence the past few weeks. I apologize. I am very frustrated right now and don't really have anything to say. No, that's not right. I have plenty to say. I just don't feel like writing it. Of course, it mostly has to do with what's going on in Israel right now and the upcoming Annapolis "Peace" Conference.

Don't get me wrong. I don't believe that anything positive - or much of anything at all, really - will come out of it. There's no real threat of Jerusalem being divided, or that there will be a total settlement freeze, etc. No, nothing will come out of this conference except for a nice picture and some more empty rhetoric about the chances finally being ripe for the hope and reality of peace to finally bloom. And, it's that empty b.s. rhetoric that has me so frustrated.

Both, Olmert and Condi Rice are going all over Israel and the U.S. spouting sonnets on how, now more than ever, the chances for peace and co-exsistence with the Palestinians are at their highest and most realistic. Olmert states that Israel is "ready" to make the sacrifices necessary for lasting peace and the Palestinians are FINALLY willing to stretch out the olive branch. In parallel, Miss Rice is traveling all over the States touting that, for the first time in known history, Israel truly has a Palestinian counterpart to talk to that can deliver on his peace promises. They both say that the ground is ready. The foundations are set. It has truly come time for peace.

Blah, blah, blah. Is anyone getting tired of this broken record yet? I remember hearing these exact same words about Arafat over a decade ago. However, these words, NOW MORE THAN EVER, TO BORROW OLMERT AND CONDI'S PHRASE, ring ever hollow. The reality of the situation has never been in more stark contrast to this rhetoric than it is now. Since the debacle of the 2005 Disengagement, the majority of the Israeli people, even those on the left, have repeatedly stated that they are NOT willing to give up any more land unless a comprehensive and realistic deal is made with the Palestinians that will ensure Israel's safety and security. In case you haven't noticed, Israel's safety and security hasn't even been MENTIONED in any of Olmert's, Condi's, or, most importantly, the peace maker of the hour, Abu Mazen's speeches in the lead-up to Annapolis.

When Arafat was called the ultimate savior of the Palestinian people and the one and only man that Israel could make peace with, he, at least, was a total dictator. He had full control on his organization and was able to reign in the other terrorist groups when he wanted to. Conversely, he was, of course, able to unleash them at will he so desired. Abu Mazen is nothing more than a pathetic weakling of a politician; a rat in a suit that's caught in a maze he can't control. He's no Arafat, and the people, and most importantly, all the organizations know it. All these pathetic carrot attempts to strengthen are only making him more weak in the eyes of the Palestinians. How can Condi really get up with a straight face and claim this is the Messiah of the Palestinian people, the one, even more so than Arafat, that can lead his "nation" to peace??? He lost Gaza even-though Fatah out-numbered and out-gunned Hamas. Hell, it's wasn't even much of a fight. He lost the Parliamentary majority to Hamas in the 2006 elections. He's running a ship with no rutter and a big gaping hole in the hull. He can no more deliver peace than he can promise to win the people's majority in the next elections.

While Olmert claims that the Palestinians are prepared for peace, he can't even ensure the safety of his own people from those said Palestinians. Rockets continue to rain down from Gaza, and he's not doing what's necessary to stop it. Hell, he still hasn't even visited the place. You Americans thinks it's so terrible that it took President Bush THREE WHOLE DAYS to visit New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina struck. Try having Bush not visiting New Orleans for over year, all the while the whole city is being drenched in flood waters that entire time. Try having him not even talk about it, EVER. Terrorist attacks are still being planned and, some are succeeding (You can't stop them all), in the West Bank. The Palestinian people still cry out for the Jews to leave all of Palestine and to go back to where they came from. Of course, I could say the same to the Palestinians, but they would cry out that they've been here since Adam and Eve. Now, who can argue with that? Ask any Joe Shmoe Muhammad Palestinian on the street, and they will still tell you that they support Hamas and ALL of its aspirations, that they want their own state, meaning from the river to the sea, and that they have no desire to have a Jewish neighbor of any kind. As Shaul Singer wrote in the Jerusalem Post this past weekend, in his article, "Measuring Success":
"... the current Palestinian position, which is essentially: What's mine is mine, and what's yours is mine too. As author Amos Oz write in an op-ed in 2001, 'Peace will arise only when the two peoples face the reality: There is your house and your garden and here is my house and my garden. Now, however, the Palestinians are saying to us: You get up and leave my house (evacuate settlements) and I will also come and live in your house (the right of return)'."

So, yes, I'm frustrated.

Technorati Tags: Israel, United+States, Condoleeza, Rice, Olmert, Abu+Mazan, Abbas, Livni, Peace, Conference, Annapolis, Palestinian, Palestine, Terror, Terrorist, Fatah, Hamas

Israel Not Playing By The Rules

2007-11-01T14:31:00.000+02:00

First things first. If you haven't seen the released video of Palestinian terrorists firing rockets into Israel from the footsteps of a Gazan school, you must watch it right away. After watching the video, you'll realize that Israel isn't playing by the rules. They're not following international law. They're not following international law by NOT firing on the launch site. But, it's a school you might say. Well, too bad. Once a civilian location or population is being used for military purposes, it becomes a legitimate target. That includes schools and even hospitals. However, the brilliant Palestinian terrorists knows very well that Israel will not fire on a civilian location, like a school, for fear of the PR upheaval that it would cause around the world. That is regardless of the fact that their actions would be completely legitimate. This is not to mention the fact that Israel cares more about Palestinian life than the Palestinians do.

That's right. Israel would rather risk its own peoples' lives by allowing rockets to be fired into their land and cities than to risk harming the enemy's children when said enemy calculatedly use their own children and population as shields in their own apocalyptic battle royale.

Of course, Israel's super discretion will NOT earn them PR points with the West. They'll continue to receive the blame for the rockets fired against them. Their care for Palestinian life will NOT earn them any love or respect from the very Palestinians that they're saving. In the school where that rocket was placed, those children were being systematically taught to hate the Jews that were protecting them at that very moment. More than that, they were being taught to aspire, to hope for, to pray for death and "martyrdom". At that moment, those children would have loved to die and be celebrated as martyrs against the occupation. The very people that were truly responsible for their deaths would have been heralded as heroes instead of villains. This is the sad reality rather you want to acknowledge or not.

So, as much you may call me a heartless racist, apartheid supporter, bigot, or whatever other kind of ridiculous accusation you can throw at me for speaking the truth and pointing out the cold hard facts, Israel needs to start playing by the rules. They need to start honoring their duty and obligation by protecting and worrying more about their own citizens' lives and their own sovereignty than about damaging their already poor PR image and about the enemy's lives. Especially when every law states that their actions are protected as righteous and correct.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Gaza, Rocket, School, Palestinian, Terror, Terrorist, Martyr, Martydom

Out Of The Worst, A Rabbi Shows An Example Of The Best

2007-10-31T16:54:00.000+02:00

(Hat Tip: LGF) Talk about Kiddush Hashem.

Camp offers shelter, peace amid fire chaos

Refusing to leave his retreat, rabbi devotes himself to serving crews battling the Slide blaze.
By Ashley Powers, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
October 29, 2007

The pairing of the rabbi and the firefighters was a natural one.

He had beds. They had been sleeping on asphalt. He had food and showers. They were grateful.

Rabbi Yosef Brod should have rushed down the mountain a week ago, when the Slide fire was burning toward Camp Gan Israel, the 75-acre Jewish camp he runs in the San Bernardino Mountains. The fire charred nearly 13,000 acres and wiped out 201 homes as it spread.

But Brod, a rabbi with the Chasidic Lubovitch, or Chabad, sect, stayed. "Have a nice day," he told his employees as they evacuated. "Drive carefully."

Over the weekend, about a dozen fire engines were parked by the giant Hanukkah candelabra at the camp. One firefighter chatted on a cellphone while another shivered in his boxers. A third asked Brod what the symbols on the cabin doors meant -- they were prayer scrolls called mezuzot that are meant to keep their occupants safe.

State prison officials also came by, looking to house inmate mop-up crews in the camp's bunks.

Brod says he kept the camp open because he believed that God would shelter the pine-shaded site, which the Chabad organization bought for summer and winter camps and weekend retreats. So Brod called his wife after the evacuations were ordered last Monday and said he wouldn't be driving home to West Hollywood.

"She knew I'm so devoted to this place I wouldn't leave," he said. One of his employees stayed, too, and told Brod that, if need be, he would carry the camp director down the mountain.
[...]
He already prays three times a day, but that afternoon, "We prayed with a little more intensity," Brod said.
[...]
So many firefighters streamed into Camp Gan Israel that Brod called other rabbis for help.

He found one fire crew sleeping on the grass just outside of camp, and offered them real beds.

"That's kind of a big deal, to have a bunch of sweaty firemen stomping through your place," said Ontario Fire Capt. Art Andres. "And this is a place where people pay good money to find rest or peace or something."

A compact man with black-rimmed glasses, a salt-and-pepper beard and a black yarmulke, Brod held a prayer service for a Jewish firefighter.

On Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath, Brod couldn't work until after sunset. So firefighters signed themselves in, writing on a yellow legal pad that they had come from departments in Chino, Upland, Rancho Cucamonga, Tuolumne and other places. They ate a traditional stew that had been prepared before sunset the night before, when the Sabbath began.

As the men and women ate each night, Brod shared his interpretation of the week's events. "One match destroys a thousand homes just like that," he told firefighters. "If we have the power to destroy the world, we have the power to make it better."

The firefighters sat in quiet with their thoughts.
[...]
After dinner, Brod went outside and climbed into his white Ford Expedition to check on his guests. He darted past cabins with nearly all the windows lighted, and slowed only to chat with firefighters. Their eyes were weary and their voices hoarse.

"So you own this whole place?" croaked one firefighter.

"God owns the world," the rabbi replied.

Technorati Tags: Fire, California, Hollywood, Rabbi, Chabad, Lubovitch, Sabbath, Firefighter, Camp

Why Dressing Modestly Needs To Come Back In Style

2007-10-29T18:23:00.000+02:00

(Hat Tip:Hot Air)

My Thoughts On Rabin's Memorial

2007-10-24T20:29:00.000+02:00

I was 13 at the time of Rabin's assassination. I was also living in America at the time. The only emotion that I really remember feeling when I found out that he had been killed was, I wasn't surprised. That's really it. I mean, c'mon, I was only 13, and I was American. I didn't have too much to do with politics, period, at the time. Yes, I went to a Zionist Day School, but I wasn't too much into Israeli politics. When the Oslo Agreement was signed, they had us watch it in class. All I can remember from watching the signing was, This isn't a good thing. I didn't know why it wasn't since I didn't really know what any of it meant, but I just felt that it wasn't a good thing. We also watched Rabin's huge funeral on in class. We actually had a special school assembly to watch it. I didn't really feel much while I watched it because I really wasn't connected to it. I know I liked the fact that we got to miss class to watch it because it lasted a while. I also remember me and my friends laughing a little bit when President Clinton ended his eulogy by trying to speak Hebrew and said, "Shalom Haver".

It's only until after I started really studying modern Israeli history and Israeli politics that I was able to quantify my visceral feelings that I had at such a young age. But, I'm not really going to mention those revelations now. There's no use, and that's not why I'm writing. There are many out there that disagree with what Rabin did. They believe that Oslo is the worst thing that Israel has done to itself to date. I tend to agree with that sentiment, but that's besides the point. It doesn't matter how much you hate or disagree with the actions of a politician or a head of state, agreeing or advocating the murder of that person is wrong and goes against everything Judaism and democracy stands for. There are those out there saying that because, theoretically, Barghouti or other violent Palestinian terrorists can be let out of prison in the future in some pathetic prisoner exchange or attempt at showing more "good will" to the Palestinians, that the Knesset should NOT pass a law stating that Yigal Amir, the one guilt of assassinating Rabin, can never be let out of prison. First of all, this is one of the reasons I advocate instituting the death penalty in Israel. Israeli society has a very messed up idea of justice and punishment and the concept incarceration. There are no standard or minimum sentences for violent crimes. Prisoners are allowed to have VACATIONS outside of the prison walls. For this and other reasons, I believe that the Israeli justice and prison system is a joke, and if I was able to, I'd overhaul the entire system.

Second of all, this is a ridiculous analogy. One has nothing to do with the other. Of course, terrorists like Barghouti should NEVER be let out of prison, not even in exchange for, sorry to say this, hostages or captives like Gilad Shalit. The certified murder that this man will commit is just too horrific to even contemplate. If the discussion ever came up, I'd be picketing with the rest of 'em. Regardless of how much you hated Rabin, there's a huge difference between a murderer and Amir. Both have taken a life, but their significance is different. Amir did something that's not just murder. He went after the representative of a democratic state because he didn't like his politics and felt he was performing a Mitzvah, in murder, on behalf of the Jewish people and Jewish state with his actions. This is an attempt at anarchy. It's not even just the killing of a Jew by a fellow Jew. This is a person that attempted to speak for an entire people by murdering the head of state. This isn't altruistic, like the assassination attempt of Hitler. I've already written an article on the profile of an assassin, so there's no point in going over it again here. If you can't tell the difference between murder and assassination, then you are letting your emotions against what Rabin stood for interfere with logic. READ THE REST...

What I want to end with are my husband's thoughts on the event. He was 14 at the time of the assassination and had to deal with many hardships in school as a result of Rabin's killing. He went to a mixed public school, where he wore a Kippa. After Rabin's assassination, he heard very negative statements about religious people and remembers the general feeling that the whole religious community was being tagged and blamed for the actions of one person. He lived in Israel through the before and the aftermath of Rabin's death. It's only fitting that he be placed in the context. I can't ever understand what it was like living here at the time just like nobody who wasn't in New York on 9/11 can understand what I felt being there. He has 3 thoughts.

1) In a democratic country, assassination is never the way to change things, and it demeans the democratic process and democracy as a whole. If anyone believes that assassinating the head of a state is the way to change policy, then they don't understand how democracy works. Violence is not the solution to political disagreements. If it was, we'd have anarchy. There were a lot of angry protests that went on against Rabin, but they weren't violent.

2) Amir's assassination of Rabin legitimized and sanctified the Oslo Process, which was well on its way to its death and was beginning to being widely recognized as failing by the people and by many politicians. In other words, had Rabin not been killed, it's very likely that Netanyahu would have won the elections by a landslide when they were held in '96, because we know what the polls were before Rabin's death. Bibi would have run on the anti-Oslo ticket, and he would have won, and he would have had a large mandate to put an end to the Oslo Process. Instead, he won but b/c of the sanctification of the Oslo agreement via Rabin's assassination, he was unable to stop going along with the Oslo train. If he had, he would have been crucified as going against Rabin's legacy and "dying wish". So, instead, he ends up signing the dastardly Hebron Agreement, speaking to Arafat, and continuing on with the Oslo Process even-though it become ever more abundantly clear that it was a failed deal that was costing the lives of thousands of Jews. There are those that continue to state that Bibi was a terrible Prime Minister, but his term was doomed from the start because of Rabin's assassination. He was completely handcuffed to "carry on Rabin's work".

3) It basically allowed for a witch hunt against the entire religious population of the country, including the branding of all the religious people of the country as being part of or supporting Rabin's death and Amir's actions. It also became illegitimate to protest against Oslo. Before Rabin's death, there were a lot of high level protests against Oslo. But, after his death, there were no more protests, or if there were, they small and low profile. It became taboo. Because of the way that the right has been illegitimated, his memorials have become a commemoration of the left. If you're on the right in any way, you don't feel welcome to memorialize him because you don't agree with what Rabin did, and you're almost made to feel dirty about that fact. After his death, there was a sense that being right wing or even being religious was something to be ashamed of, and when the elections came along after his assassination, there were even posters of "We know who Yigal Amir's voting for". Meaning, Bibi or any right wing party. There was a sense that if the Oslo process was killed, or being against the process, it meant that Amir won, or you were for his deeds.

Also, it must be remembered that Rabin wasn't the lone person responsible for Oslo. The government voted to approve the deal. That's how democracy works. And, in a democracy, the people speak. Rabin was assassinated in '95. Elections were going to be in November of '96. Rabin would have LOST. Bibi would have won, and he would have stopped Oslo. Instead, Rabin became a martyr, and Oslo becomes his last charge that Israel was duty bound to carry out. So, in my mind, I disagree with those that say that Rabin has the blood of thousands on his hands b/c of Oslo. If we lived in a dictatorship or tyranny, I may agree with you, but we live in a democracy. The government voted on the Agreement, and they didn't have to. If Rabin hadn't been killed, Oslo would have ended for good in '96. Instead, it was forced to continue on a devastating path and didn't officially die until Barak's Taba and Camp David deals were killed by Arafat, and the Intifada. That's more than 5 years worth of terror and bloodshed that didn't have to happen, and it's because of Amir's actions. So, the minute Rabin was assassinated, I hold Yigal Amir personally responsible for every Jew and Israeli that was killed. It is Amir, NOT Rabin, that has the death of thousands on his hands.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Rabin, Memorial, Assassination, Oslo, Peace, Arafat, Amir, Barghouti, Terror, Terrorist, Intifada

Jerusalem

2007-10-21T13:33:00.000+02:00

There's a very good reason that I haven't written about the latest discussion regarding dividing Jerusalem as part of a "peace" agreement with the Palestinians. It's not going to happen any time soon, so there's no point in really discussing it in any sort of depth. However, I read an excellent article this Shabbat in Maariv. So, I'll write two sentences on the subject.

It's an absolute shame and disgust that Jerusalem is even on the table as any sort of option regardless of whether it's a realistic topic for discussion. Finally, IF JERUSALEM IS SPLIT IN ANY SORT OF WAY, IT IS THE OFFICIAL END OF THE ZIONIST DREAM AND ZIONIST ENDEAVOR.

End of story.

Eastern Jerusalem Arabs Are Scared To Death Of Becoming Palestinians

2007-10-18T13:48:00.000+02:00

Don't take my word for it.
E. Jerusalem Arabs Prefer Israeli Rule

Many eastern Jerusalem Arabs are unhappy over the prospect of their neighborhoods becoming part of a Palestinian state, as demanded by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

The Toronto Globe & Mail quoted Nabil Gheit, a shop owner and mayor of the Ras Hamis community in Jerusalem, as saying that if a referendum were held on the issue, "no one would vote to join the Palestinian Authority." PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas has declared that any agreement that is signed with Israel will be submitted to the people for a vote.

Imposing PA rule in the area would cause another Intifada "to defend ourselves from the PA," he added. "At least in Israel, there's law."

This is not the first time such sentiments have been expressed. I myself have spoken with some Palestinians who declared that they were far happier and definitely more prosperous financially under Israeli rule than under the Palestinian Authority. One businessman whispered to me, 'I pray every day that Israel will take back Bethlehem [his former home]. We had a good life there under Israeli rule. Since Bethlehem was given to the PA, we have all fled out of there. Thugs rule the streets. It's awful."

Technorati Tags: Israel, PA, Palestinian+Authority, Mahmoud, Abbas, Bethlehem, Palestinians

Real Desecration Ignored By World & MSM

2007-10-16T13:10:00.000+02:00

As the Mainstream Media and foreign governments resume berating Israel for construction of a bridge next to the Western Wall, claiming that it infringes on the Al-Quds Mosque, while in reality being nowhere in the vicinity of the Temple Mount, they are consequently ignoring the real desecration. The Muslim Waqfi has control over the Temple Mount, not the Jews or the Israeli Government even though it is the holiest site in all of Judaism. As the world makes a mountain out of a non-existent mole hill, the Waqfi are pulling the wool over their eyes as they dig up the Temple Mount area. It has been well known that the Waqfi have, over the past 40 years, uncovered countless priceless artifacts from the Second Temple period. Instead of preserving them or even bothering to call in archaeologists, they have simply thrown these artifacts away with the day's trash. The reason is simple. The waqfi have a vested interest in attempting to convince their people and the world that there is no proof any Jewish Temple existed and that, subsequently, the Jews have no connection to the site, and that it ultimately belongs to the Muslims and Islam itself.

OK, fine. That's been going on for years and have been relatively ignored. Why does the world ignores it and chosen to cry whenever the Arabs make a fuss over Israeli/Jewish archaeological digs that have never been in the vicinity of or in any danger of ruining the Muslims' section of the Temple Mount? Because, unlike the Muslims, the Jews aren't going to riot and threaten and kill anyone over these artifacts. Human life is more important to us than some pots regardless of their historical significance. Besides, we believe that when the Temple is rebuilt, G-d will dole out due retribution to those that have dared to desecrate His sanctuary. But, now comes a desecration of epic proportions. While digging up ground, unsupervised and with no regard for archaeological integrity, the Waqfi has uncovered and is subsequently destroying an entire section of what used to to be part of the Second Temple. And, yet, no-one is saying a word. The world is concentrating on the Jews' non-aggression, and they are absolutely ignoring what the Waqfi is doing. I'm sure the Waqfi is just laughing their way all the way to the Mosque. Yes, and we're expected to buy it when the Palestinians claim that if they had control over the Old City, including the Western Wall, they would both care for any historical artifacts found and allow the Jews to pray in peace. Yup, OK.

Here's a great video on the latest desecration:
http://www.yideoz.com/view_video.php?viewkey=76845cd235b6a510c690

Technorati Tags: Israel, Temple, Mount, Mosque, Second+Temple, Desecration, Waqf, Muslim, Islam, Jerusalem

The Prize that sullies the name, Nobel

2007-10-13T18:30:00.000+02:00

So, after much campaigning and fear mongering, Al Gore and the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been awarded the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. The fact that Gore's screeching about the impending and very imminent climate doom - via melting ice caps via man's capitalist driven thirst to destroy the environment through their humanity crushing oil guzzling SUVs - has never once mentioned having any desire to bring peace through his drive to bring "awareness" of the upcoming climate Apolcalypse should tell you two things about the Noble Peace Prize. One, it has become a futile and disgustingly hypocritical spit on the very idea of "Peace". Then again, once you give the Prize to a sworn terrorist with the blood of thousands on his hands, I guess any-one is eligible for the prize. Next year, I'm going to nominate Charles Manson. Who's with me? Secondly, has 2007 been such a paltry year in the "peace" department that a Global Warming advocate gets the prize??? I'm wondering why they even need this category to begin with. It's like giving out a best gopher prize at the Oscars. What the hell does that have to do with acting? It is such a fluff category, and going down the list of recipients, you can see the cold hard proof of that. It means nothing. A very small majority of Nobel Peace recipients have actually had anything to do with not only promoting peace but actually doing something proven to achieve some sort of measure of peace. Let's be clear, by the time Rabin, Peres, and Arafat received the Prize, the Oslo Accords were already well on their way to bloody disaster. So, they received an award for signing their names properly on a piece of paper. I guess, that means next year Kindergartners will win the award. All I'm saying is that the whole essence of the Nobel Prize loses a lot of credibility with the Peace category.

My friend has actually written a great analysis of the whole history and background of the Nobel Peace Prize. I'm going to reprint it in full, and include some editorial commentary where I feel it's needed. READ THE REST...

(Source: Journal Terra Incognita)

Issue 6
A Publication of Seth J. Frantzman
Jerusalem, Israel

The fall of the Nobel peace prize
October 12th, 2007

It may be no surprise that the committee of the Nobel Peace Prize awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to the U.N. In many ways it serves to illustrate the uselessness and utter failure of both organizations. The U.N is incapable of making peace and the Nobel Prize committee has essentially awarded the prize to itself: or rather another nebulous body of erudite Europeans and groveling third worlders. The fact that Al Gore was named, along with the ‘U.N’ as a recipient merely shows how low he has sunk.

The Nobel Peace Prize was first awarded in 1901 to Frederic Passy and Jean Henry Dunant, the first a peace activist and the latter the father of the Red Cross. For the first 13 years of the Prize’s existence it continued to be awarded to men of caliber who were involved in international arbitration, or international peace work. Some of the recipients were obscure. Some were not. Teddy Roosevelt received the prize due to his long work at international arbitration including the conference to end the Russo-Japanese war. Members of the ‘inter-parliamentary union’, socialists, and peace advocates from Italy to Germany were recipients. The first organization to receive the prize was the Institute of International Law in 1904.

During the first world war the prizes, except in 1917, were awarded to the Red Cross. After the war many of them went to men involved with the League of Nations, including Woodrow Wilson. Fridjof Nansen, famous explorer and peace activist was also awarded a prize in 1922. In the 1930s many members of the committee were in favor of awarding the League of Nations itself the prize, but Halvdan Koht, a historian, threatened to resign and the League, which had proved useless at stopping Italy’s invasion of Ethiopia and countless other aggressions, did not receive the prize. A Prisoner of the Nazis, Carl Von Ossietzky received the prize, as did writers and women’s peace activists. [ed. It should also be noted that during the 1930s, Hitler himself was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize by a Nazi sympathizer on the Panel. To that effect, I should mention that there continues to be anti-semitic and known neo-Nazi influences on the panel for the Prize. At least one of the female judges is a known Antisemite. Oh yeah, and it should further be noted that Norway continues to have anti-Jewish laws on its books, especially laws pertaining to the limitations on Jewish land and business ownership. There's a reason there are less than 200 Jews left in Norway whereas there used to be a robust Jewish community there.]

Perhaps the first seeds of the fall of the Nobel prize can be seen in these years between 1930 and 1945 when it not only awarded the Red Cross a Prize during the war, despite the fact that the Red Cross covered up Nazi atrocities [ed. Not only did they cover up atrocities by not reporting the extent of the Jewish Genocide, but they also did nothing to help the Jews in the Concentration and Death Camps even-though they were granted access to them by the Nazis.] , but also suggested the League of Nations for a prize. After the war many of the prizes were awarded to men involved with the U.N, including Ralph Bunche and Cordell Hull, both Americans. The first U.N body to receive the prize was the Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees. The Nobel prize at this time began to take a lasting interest in the Middle East, Bunche, the Office of the High Commissioner and Canada’s Lester Bowles Pearson and Dag Hammarskjold were all awarded prizes between 1950 and 1965. The first non-westerner to receive the prize was Zulu chief Albert John Lutuli, for his work as head of the ANC and as a ‘human rights’ activist.

In the 1980s the U.N continued to rack up awards including one for the Office of the High Commissioner on Refugees (again) and the United Nations peacekeeping Forces [ed. The same Peacekeeping Forces that have been proven to not only not "keep the peace" in the regions they're deployed but are also pillaging and raping the very people they are sworn to protect]. More deserving individuals also received prizes such as Lech Walsea, Andrea Sakharov, Willy Brandt and Eisaku Sato (former Japanese P.M). Henry Kissinger and Lee Duc Tho received a prize in 1973 for helping to pretend to end the Vietnam war. Manachem Begin, the first Jew to receive the prize, and Anwar Sadat received the prize in 1978. Eilie Weasel, The Dalai Lama and Mother Theresa would also receive prizes in 1979 and 186 respectively. Gorbachev got one [ed. President Reagan did not receive the honor of sharing the prize with him for being the main reason the Iron Curtain finally fell.] and so did De Klerk and Mandela. Shimon Peres, Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin got one. David Trimble and John Hume got one for their role in ending the violence in Northern Ireland. Amnesty international, Medicines San Frontieres, anti-nuclear and anti-landmines groups all received prizes. 2003-2006 were the Muslim Years of the Nobel Peace Prize as it altered its outlook due to 9/11 and realized the Muslims needed to be included in its largesse. Shirin Ebadi, Mohammed El Baradei and Muhammed Yunus were awarded prizes for women’s rights, nuclear proliferation and helping the poor respectively.

Perhaps the inclusion of El Baradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Commission presaged the 2007 award. He has sat atop an organization that has done the opposite of its purview for the past 10 years. During his tenure nuclear weapons have proliferated on a massive scale, to North Korea, India, Pakistan, Syria, Iran, Libya, and beyond. He has, unsurprisingly, been the largest opponent of doing anything to prevent Iran’s nuclear ambitions. [ed. It should be noted that SYRIA has recently been appointed co-chair of the IAEA.]

In 2007 the award went to Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Neither one has ever campaigned for peace in even the most rudimentary war. However they have both been involved in the latest fad of claiming that conflicts are due to climate change [ed. A baseless theory that Al Gore has done nothing to prove, but because it panders to fear mongering and bringing more support to his cause, he has championed this cry. "Just imagine it. If we do something to stop global warming, wars will automatically end. That's all there is to it!" Sounds cheap and easy enough. Where do I sign up?]. The brilliant assessment of leading anti-global warming people that climate change fuels the genocide in the Sudan has provided a wonderful excuse for the genocidaires. They aren’t to blame, it’s the hot weather that makes them rape and kill. Perhaps climate change caused Hitler and the Nazis to need more Labensraum.

It seems the history of the Nobel Peace Prize and its recipients could best be broken down into two groups of people and organizations: Those that did something to achieve peace, and those that did nothing except talk. Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Elihu Root, Nelson Mandela, Mother Theresa and Manachem Begin might be included in the former category. The U.N, the Red Cross and numerous other organizations and people could be included in the latter. [ed. I should also mention that the Red Cross organization has done NOTHING to prevent or stop its Red Crescent members from allowing their ambulances to be used as terrorist aides and transports (completely and utterly against any international law), especially in the Palestinian territories. Not only have terrorists used the ambulances to evade capture and shelter from which to continue firing their weapons from, they have also used the ambulances to transport explosives into Israel to commit terrorist attacks. This is on top of the fact that the Red Cross has reinforced anti-semitism by only allowing the Magen David Adom to officially join the organization after it agreed to changed its symbol from a big star of David to a small one with an arbitrary diamond around. This was done in capitulation to Red Crescent demands.] They talk about peace, talk, and talk and talk, but they do nothing. The U.N has never, in its history, done anything to bring peace to anywhere. It has taken credit, of course, for bringing peace, but it has only done so after the actual parties to the conflict had already resolved to have peace. In many places the U.N has actively encouraged violence, been part and parcel to the conflict or sat by while genocide has taken place. The U.N did nothing to end the fighting in the Lebanese refugee camp, Nahr al Balad, for the four months in which it was slowly leveled and destroyed by the Lebanese Army [ed. The UN Security Council, especially, called no emergency session, nor did the General Assembly hold a special meeting when it was proven that the Lebanese Army was taking no caution to avoid civilian casualties, and was arbitrarily pounding artillery shells into the camp to avoid military casualties knowing full well that they were randomly hitting civilian targets. This complete lack of concern for non-combatants resulted in hundreds of Palestinian deaths. No, the special sessions are reserved specially Israel. In fact, the UN, as a whole, applauded the Lebanese government for taking a strong stance on terrorism.] It did nothing between 1976 and 2005 to ensure peace on Israel’s northern border and in 1967 it collaborated with Gamel Abdel Nasser to evacuate the Sinai peninsula, against its mandate, so that the area could be re-militarized. In Rwanda it watched and sipped tea as 400,000 people died [ed. In fact, the UN's peace keeping mandate hampered the American military's ability to help the people. They were FORCED to stand idly by even as they watched innocent civilians being murdered in front of their eyes.]. It has done nothing in the Sudan. In many places, including Hutu refugee camps in the Congo and Palestinian refugee camps in Gaza, its buildings and organizations have been infiltrated by militants and it has been used by terrorists and killers.

The time is coming with the Nobel Committee will award itself a prize for its fake work at encouraging peace. That will be its ultimate tombstone.

Technorati Tags: Nobel, Peace, Prize, Al+Gore, UN, United+Nations, Global, Warming, Climate, Change, Israel, Jew, Nazi, Hitler, Muslim, Red+Cross, Red+Crescent, Genocide, Sudan

You Are Cordially Invited...

2007-10-07T13:09:00.000+02:00

(Got this via E-mail; Very funny and oh so true if you're of the Jewish persuasion.)

Bar Mitzvah Invitation

In keeping up with the Rosen's and the Abelson's,
It is with great stress, emotional and physical fatigue
and incredible financial sacrifice beyond comprehension,
that we invite you to join us as our wonderful son
Jacob Adam
is called to
the Torah as a Bar Mitzvah.

Saturday, May 12th - (yes we realize its Mother's Day Weekend)
Temple Israel
14 Coleytown Road
Westport , Connecticut 06880
at the ungodly hour of 9 am even though you don't really need
to be there until 10:20am to catch the real action.

If you make it through the 3 hour service, please skip the kiddush
(it's just cookies and cake) and join us instead for an overly large
and ostentatious Kosher (my husband's idea) evening meal,
which starts at 7 PM,
(not 8 PM.. or you will miss out on the 2000 canapes).
Birchwood Country Club
25 Kings Hwy S
Westport , CT 06880
(which we had to join just for this event and
you would not believe the initiation fees)

You will be in the presence of lots of boisterous and expensive entertainment
and 60 to 70 unruly pre-teens wearing
expensive dresses, funny hats, fake bling and brand new white ankle socks...
as well as 80-100 middle aged+ adults, some balding, some with bad toupees, most will be professionally coiffed, designer attire galore, lots of REAL bling, and most "tootsed" to the nines. At least 1/3 will be hormonally challenged and some will act stupid while under the influence. Some will not even know where or who they are. Some will complain about the food. Blah Blah Blah.
Please have the courtesy of showing up if you RSVP that you are attending, or you will be billed for $210.00 a plate if you are a no-show. Please RSVP as soon as you get this and not a day before the cut-off date. I can't take the stress.
The gift of choice is either green, or contains a routing and account number. "Off the top of your head" gifts
and Gift Cards are a waste of your time and ours.

Hope you can make it! Lisa and David Miller
Dress: Black Tie optional
Theme: 007 James Bond
BYO Kippot. I don't have the strength.

Hard To Blog These Days

2007-09-24T19:22:00.000+02:00

It's been very difficult to find the will to blog these past couple of months. Oh, trust me, I have the time. I'm a lazy procrastinator of the worst kind. Blogging is usually the thing I do when I have other more important matters to deal with but just don't feel like it. However, for the last couple of months, I just haven't really felt like logging on to put down my thoughts and feelings and ideas. Don't get me wrong. I have just as much to say now as I always do, but every time I get the urge the right or feel like I have something to say, I just can't seem to get the urge to type them out.

I don't really understand why this is happening. In any case, in order to try to get over this hump and attempt to get back to regular blogging, I think I might need to keep my thoughts short instead of the usual novels I tend to express myself in. OK, here it goes. Here are my thoughts for today:

- Maybe, all Ivy League Schools are this arrogant by design of their reputation and standing. But, the gall and arrogance of Columbia University's President Bollinger is ridiculous and laughable. That he thinks that HE, of all people, can not only successfully confront but also force the Iranian President to answer tough questions with any sort of directness or honesty is pathetic. As I've said before, Columbia University's decision to INVITE is simply a microcosmic example of the greater sickness that is being suffered on college campuses throughout the United States. Allowing a terrorist to speak in the name of "free speech"? OK, then, I expect Columbia to next not just allow but to INVITE with open arms the ROTC that they have banned from campus decades ago. Then, on the list is the director of the Minutemen, whose invitation Columbia rescinded after a confrontation last year. Then, they will INVITE the grand wizard of the Klu Klux klan. No? I thought we're in the business of allowing different ideas and opinions on the college campus. If that's the case, why can't a guy stand up and discuss their opinions about the black and Jewish races?

Let's get real here. Looking at the left-wing sites like the Daily Kos, the reason that those that are agreeing with Mahdi's "right" to spew his hatred is because they AGREE with what he's saying. They don't believe he's a terrorist. No, how could he be? Bush is the biggest terrorist of them all. To them, even Bin-Laden aint so bad. They think he's cute, and even-though he'd kill them and, actually rip apart every single civil right these nut jobs believe that Bush is stealing, just as soon as look at them, many of them would rather he be their President than Bush. They agree with his notions that Israel should be destroyed. They may not agree that the Holocaust didn't happen, but they certainly believe that the evil neocons and dastardly Zionists have hijacked the Holocaust to "justify" every action Israel has committed since before its inception. So, really, what's the big deal if Ahmadenijad comes to speak at Columbia? What he's saying isn't so bad, is it?

By the way, is this really a great and grand exercise in free speech? Not really, as it turns out. Courtesy of Hot Air:

Closed to the public, no protest signs allowed, questions to be asked via index card with no back-and-forth between the students and honored guest. A “free exchange of ideas” indeed. In a way I’m glad, though: this puts all the pressure on Bollinger to grill him. If he softballs him — which he probably won’t lest the few remaining scraps of his credibility end up in the toilet — he’ll never hear the end of it.

- When the Dean of one of Columbia's schools said that the would have HAPPILY invited Hitler in 1939, a thought came to me. You know what? In the scope of history, we have to finally admit that we re in 1939 all over again. We are once again on the precipice of a major historical event, and once again, most of the West, especially Europe, is on the wrong side. Europe is trying its hardest to ignore Israel's air-strike in Syria earlier this month. Whatever happened, we do know for a fact North Korea was involved in it. Those European nations involved in the much maligned and haplessly failed 6 party talks have chosen to remain, either, silent or belligerent on the event. They have invested over 7 years of failure and appeasement with nothing to show for it but North Korea's AND Iran's continued build up in nuclear weapons and material. Europe really does want that when this time they stand up and scream once again, "Peace in Our Time", without a shot being fired, it will actually be true. Of course, we know that those those do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

There is only one difference between 1939 then and 1939 now: ISRAEL. This time around, the Jews won't go quietly or easily into that good night. This time we won't wait around again as the West sacrifices us. This time, we'll fight for our survival. This time, we'll win and save the rest of the world from themselves. Yet again.

- As I watch Bollinger speak, he has yet to have Mahdi answer a question. It is so pathetically obvious that nothing positive will come of this except Mahdi going back to his country telling his people how many supporters he actually has in the United States. Mahdi will not answer any question directly and will come away looking no worse than when he entered the auditorium and will have earned oodles of PR and propaganda points for having the "courage" to stand up to the evil Americans and Zionists that try to bully him into betraying his country's most fundamental beliefs. Ahmadenijad has all the free speech he wants back at home. He doesn't need it on American soil where he has directly sponsored the deaths of hundreds and thousands of American lives dating all the way back to the 1983 Marine Barracks bombing in Beirut, Lebanon.

Bollinger may not have to stand up for this meeting, but he will have to now answer to his hypocrisy of "free speech" in regards to all the other people and groups that he has not allowed or invited to speak on his campus. As he finishes his speech, his arrogance shines through in spades. He says that he feels the weight of the free world on his shoulder for his questions to be tough enough. Why?!? He's the one who asked Mahdi there to begin with. Again, what did he think HE was going to be able to accomplish???

Ah, the students clap for Ahmadenijad and his words! Why am I not surprised. This is already going as bad or worse as I expected. Good work, Bollinger. You really hit it out of the ball-park on this time.

Technorati Tags: Iran, Israel, Jew, Holocaust, Left, Wing, Columbia

Day Of Atonement

2007-09-21T15:35:00.000+02:00

The husband and I wish y'all an easy and meaningful fast. If we have ever done anything to hurt, harm, or insult any of you, please grant us forgiveness. We certainly forgive all of you.

Hitler To Vist Yad Vashem To Pay His Respects

2007-09-20T17:32:00.000+02:00

Sound ridiculous? Well, besides the fact that Hitler is dead, this is how nonsensical it sounds that today's most notorious Holocaust denier and Genocidal promoter, Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadenijad, not only wants to lay a wreath to "pay his respects" at Ground Zero in New York City, but he has also been invited to speak at Columbia University.

While Walt and Mearsheimer are hawking their modern version of The Protocols of The Elders of Zion and complaining about a secret Israeli/Jewish attempt to silence their "dissent", Columbia University's Arab oil money laden Middle Eastern Studies Department and Dean of the School is welcoming Ahmadenijad with open arms. All in the name of "free speech" and the "public debate of ideas". I didn't know that openly calling for the destruction of another country and denying the death of 6 million + people fell under the guise of free speech and public debate. I don't know. Maybe, I've just been out of college for too long. Would Columbia University have allowed Adolph Hitler to come to speak at their school in 1933? Would they have allowed him to spout his propaganda and call for the eradication of the Jewish people to ensure the survival and supremacy of the Aryan race? Well, if the school was run by the post-modern relativist Arab money run "educators" that are ruling Columbia today, they would have been more than happy to allow Hitler to exercise his right to free speech and dispersion of "different ideas".

OK, let me put it another way. Would Columbia allow the grand wizard of the KKK come speak and discuss how the "inferior black race" has to be eradicated and driven our of America? Would Columbia allow some "historian" come speak and discuss how black slavery NEVER happened, and how he has found new "historical proof" that "proved" that blacks were brought voluntarily and those that died at sea died of sea related diseases and not because of abuse of some systematic method by their sea carriers? If you dare to answer yes to any of these questions, you're lying to yourself. You're also not living in reality. READ THE REST...

For some "unexplainable" reason, it is only the Jews that are free reign for "debate". When the Holocaust is denied, or Holocaust deniers brought to college campuses, it is protected under free speech. That's the way it should be. I'm not arguing with the right to spout off whatever disgusting or perverse piece of garbage you want. However, nobody fights it because there are many that believe that the topic deserves to be "debated" and other "ideas" and "opinions" should be open to discussion. Any sane person would say that historical fact is not open for debate or difference of "opinion". The Holocaust's historical fact is just as proven as 200 years of black slavery. Who has ever stood up and dared to debate black slavery? Even if some college white supremacist group dared to try and put some advertisement in the school newspaper "debating" whether black slavery happened, no paper would accept it. But, the Holocaust is fair game.

Columbia's audacity is just a symptom of a greater issue. The left and liberal elites of today, especially on college campuses, believe that Israel is a mistake that needs to be rectified by its destruction. Now, I'm sure that they don't believe Israel should be destroyed violently, but the do believe that Israel should not exist and should never have been created. They believe Zionism is evil, thereby admitting boldly that Jews, unlike any other group in the world, don't deserve to have their own country and are barred from self-determination. Of course, conversely, they believe that the Palestinians have an inherent right to their own land and believe that every second it is denied to them is a violation of every sacred human rights law that has ever existed. Go figure. Is this double standard antisemitism? Make up your own mind. They call it anti-Zionism. I don't see a difference. The second you single out one group at the expense of any other group committing the same "crime", you are treading in the discrimination pool, regardless of what you call it.

I could go on, but what does this small example of the liberal elite's attitude say about Columbia University's latest move? They see the Iranian President's speech as nothing more than promoting an opinion they all already espouse. His call for the destruction of Israel is NOT a call for genocide in the minds of these Ivy League educators. Oh no. It is merely a call to help the Palestinians gain their national manifest destiny. And, this is all that the liberals want. There is no terrorism. They are all freedom fighters, fighting the evil Nazi Israelis for their right to a country.

I'll leave you with one last piece of food for thought. This little tidbit will allow you to really understand why Ahmadenijad's speaking at Columbia is not at all strange. If you walk down the halls of the Middle Eastern Studies Department, where the Professors' offices are, you will see many maps of the Middle East on their doors. Many of these maps do NOT include Israel on the map. Instead, PALESTINE covers where Israel should be. Not, just Gaza and the West Bank, but the entire country.

Technorati Tags: Iran, New+York, Ground+Zero, Columbia, University, Hitler, Middle+East, Israel, Jew, Holocaust

It's Moving Day!!

2007-08-13T11:18:00.000+03:00

OK, it's been hell. The husband and I are in the processing of moving apartments, and on top of all that, I'm really sick. We'll be incommunicado for the next several days as we got our new house in order. Wish us luck!!!

MSM Ignores Deaths As Palestinians Continute To Be Killed.... BY THEIR FELLOW PALESTINIANS

2007-08-08T12:52:00.000+03:00

I got this link this morning and feel that it's important to point out. This is a fact that doesn't just happen in Gaza or the West Bank. It is something that occurs all over the Muslim/Arab world. The entire echelon of the Mainstream Media always and completely ignores and disregards Muslim on Muslim or Arab on Arab violence. More Arabs/Muslims are killed by their fellow Arabs/Muslims than any Western country COMBINED. In Israel, it's especially prevalent. When a Palestinian, terrorist or not, is killed by Israel, the numbers are plastered on front pages and news alerts all over the Western world. When Palestinians are killing other Palestinians, not a SOUND-BYTE or BY-LINE to be found. Well, while the West has ignored the statistics, Palestinians just keep on dying at the hands of their brothers.

(Hat Tip: Soccer Dad)
"Grim milestone" reached: 500 Palestinian Arabs killed by each other this year

A 2 1/2 year old girl was shot and killed near the Jabalya "refugee camp" according to Palestine Today (autotranslated):

Palestinian medical sources announced this evening in the killing of infant girls mi lamp defrocked and that at age two and a half years due to injuries sustained in the head from an unknown source at the Ho Ha front of her house near the Civil Administration east of the Jabaliya refugee camp.

According to our correspondent in the northern sector, the girl "mi Shalhah" hit back Wednesday bullet in the head from an unknown source at the Ho Ha front of her house located in the street near railway from the Civil Administration, was transferred to hospital Shahid Kamal Adwan, hailing her death was announced later the same day.

We have reached the "grim milestone" of 500 PalArabs that we have been able to document violently killed by each other this year.

Since we started the self-death count 13 months ago, we have documented 705 violent deaths of Palestinian Arabs due to infighting, honor killings, "work accidents," shootings during funerals and weddings, children picking up bombs being built by their parents, and similar self-inflicted incidents.

Don't expect any press releases about this milestone, though.

UPDATE: 3rd death announced this morning from IJ/Hamas clashes. I guess that last Monday's Hamas media blitz to promote Gaza's safety is taking a hit. 501.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Gaza, West+Bank, Muslim, Arab, West, Media, Hamas, Terror, Terrorist

Cold War Politics Returns To Table As U.S. Tries To Grasp At Straws In Middle East

2007-08-03T10:30:00.000+03:00

I've been meaning to write about this for a while now, but just haven't had the time. So, in the spirit of my laziness, Melanie Phillips has done my work for me. The Cold War politics of "The enemy of my enemy of my friend" was extremely costly. The West has been paying the price of using this strategy to defeat th Soviets since the fall of the Iron Curtain. Pumping up Iraq to defeat Iran brought us the first Gulf War. Giving aid and weapons to the Afghan rebels led to the Taliban's rise to power and haven for Osama Bin Laden to plan and carry out his terrorist attacks leading up to 9/11. While I in NO WAY place any blame on America or America's foreign policy for 9/11, you cannot dispute the fact that the Cold War strategy ultimately failed while it did bring down the Soviet Union. I know that sounds contradictory, but it's true when you face the effects of that policy.

Whether you agree with that assessment or not, the truth is that it is undeniable that the Cold War Strategy is completely IRRELEVENT in the present Middle East situation, whether it be the Israeli-Arab conflict or the broader War on Terror. It is not apt or fit for the situation that is now presented to us on the global Jihad stage. The Jihadi ideology is not the same as the Soviet Communist political philosophies. Both are rational players but in very different ways, and the way to stop the Jihadis is not the same as the mehtods used to stop the Soviets.

To me, while using the Realist Theory, the West's new approach to the Jihadist threat is just plain lazy. While the Jihadists are patient and could wait years upon years to commit one terrorist attack, the West has simply grown tired and lost the attention span to fight them. Instead, they'll just throw billions of dollars worth of weapons and illegitimate legitimacy at the so-called moderate Arab/Muslim states in the mere speck of hope that they will fight the war the West no longer has the will to fight. Ultimately, the West is willing and seems very ready to sacrifice their alliance and the very existence of Israel in the ridiculous hope that that will mean that countries like Iran or groups like Hezbollah or Al-Qaeda will leave them alone and be appeased with feasting on Israel's burnt flesh.
READ THE REST...

August 2, 2007
My enemy’s enemy

‘My enemy’s enemy is my friend’ is a principle that has always underpinned realpolitik. It is extremely stupid. My enemy’s enemy may also be… my enemy.

Saudi Arabia is supposedly our ally against al Qaeda. While it may well be the case that it has been useful to us in providing intelligence and so forth, it is also the intellectual and religious fount of al Qaeda. Having created this monster, Saudi then found to its dismay that it turned into its own most bitter attacker. So Saudi fights al Qaeda terrorism inside its own borders, but sees no reason to cease funding and promoting jihad against the rest of the world.

Now Saudi sees an even bigger threat to itself from Iran. On the ‘my enemy’s enemy is my friend’ principle, the US is taking advantage of that to try to use Saudi as leverage against Iran. The US also seems to think that ‘solving’ the Israel Arab impasse will help defeat Islamist terror (which is, of course, precisely the wrong way round); or maybe President Bush is merely desperate to leave as his legacy a peace deal between Israel and the Arabs (dream on) [**ed. This has been the downfall of every President since the creation of Israel in 1948. Let me state this only once. No U.S. President has successfully brokered a peace deal for Israel with any other Arab entity. Every attempt has ended in total and utter failure precisely because these Presidents want to be the one known to herald in "peace" rather than actually bringing peace**]. Whatever. Either way, there is now a US/Saudi love-in going on. So the US has just given it a whopping $11 billion arms deal, and Saudi has graciously indicated that it may attend the Middle East peace conference the US is organising for the autumn which will consider, we are told, a revival of the Saudi Middle East ‘peace plan’.

People are hailing the prospect of Saudi sitting down with Israel as a breakthrough. It should be seen instead as the US forcing Israel to embrace a scorpion. The so-called ‘peace plan’ by Saudi — which has never recognised Israel and which forbids Jews to enter its own territory — requires Israel to return to the 1967 border, which is in fact the 1949 armistice line otherwise known as the ‘Auschwitz border’ because it would leave Israel undefended against genocide. Which is, of course, the intention.

The other arm of the Saudi pincer of peace is the demand for the return of the so-called Palestinian ‘refugees’ (they are as much refugees as I am a refugee from Poland from where my grandparents fled the pogroms in the early years of the last century) which is tantamount to the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state. Which is, of course, the intention.

It is obvious that Saudi Arabia is making only rhetorical and deeply dishonest gestures to convey the impression that it is a serious player in the ‘peace process’.

The Jerusalem Post has pointed out what Saudi Arabia could do if it was really serious about peace with Israel:

… the Saudis and other Arab states can take serious steps to dismantle the monster they created and continue to feed: the Arab-Israeli conflict. Attending a conference would be nice, but it is substance that matters. The key substantive things they can do is to stop their diplomatic warfare against Israel, drop their illegal trade boycotts, combat the rampant anti-Semitism in their countries, and start openly breaking it to the Palestinians that their ‘right of return’ can only be to a future state of Palestine, not to Israel.

Of course Saudi won’t do this. Indeed, the idea that Saudi is anything other than the enemy of civilisation is ludicrous. Power Line quotes Dore Gold, head of the Jerusalem Centre for Public Affairs, who points out that based on Israel’s 2003 intelligence assessment, 50 to 70 percent of Hamas’s budget derives from Saudi Arabia. Gold also told YNet:

--Several years ago, Israel received reports of the interrogation of al-Qaeda captives who admitted that their organization had penetrated the Saudi Arabian air force, and that it was planning to take control of several Saudi F-15s based at Tabuk in north Western Saudi Arabia, near Eilat, and fly the fighter planes into sky scrapers in Tel Aviv, Gold said. ‘From the pattern of past al-Qaeda attacks in Saudi Arabia, many western observers have concluded that elements of the Saudi national guard colluded with the attackers. Which only further substantiates Western concern that al-Qaeda has penetrated different branches of Saudi Armed forces.’

Saudi also turns out to be heavily involved in Iraq — and guess what, not on our side. A few days ago the New York Times, no less, reported that the US is angry at

Saudi Arabia’s counterproductive role in the Iraq war

Counterproductive? You can say that again.

They say that beyond regarding Mr. Maliki as an Iranian agent, the Saudis have offered financial support to Sunni groups in Iraq. Of an estimated 60 to 80 foreign fighters who enter Iraq each month, American military and intelligence officials say that nearly half are coming from Saudi Arabia and that the Saudis have not done enough to stem the flow…

The American officials in Iraq also say that the majority of suicide bombers in Iraq are from Saudi Arabia and that about 40 percent of all foreign fighters are Saudi. Officials said that while most of the foreign fighters came to Iraq to become suicide bombers, others arrived as bomb makers, snipers, logisticians and financiers. American military and intelligence officials have been critical of Saudi efforts to stanch the flow of fighters into Iraq, although they stress that the Saudi government does not endorse the idea of fighters from Saudi Arabia going to Iraq. On the contrary, they said, Saudi Arabia is concerned that these young men could acquire insurgency training in Iraq and then return home to carry out attacks in Saudi Arabia — similar to the Saudis who turned against their homeland after fighting in Afghanistan in the 1980s.

The Bush administration’s relationship with Saudi Arabia has deteriorated steadily since the United States invasion of Iraq, culminating in April when, bitingly, King Abdullah, during a speech before Arab heads of state in Riyadh, condemned the American invasion of Iraq as ‘an illegal foreign occupation.’ A month before that, King Abdullah effectively torpedoed a high-profile meeting between Israelis and Palestinians, planned by Ms. Rice, by brokering a power-sharing agreement between the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, and the militant Islamist group Hamas that did not require Hamas to recognize Israel. While that agreement eventually fell apart, the Bush administration, on both occasions, was caught off guard and became infuriated.

But Saudi officials have not been too happy with President Bush, either, and the plummeting of America’s image in the Muslim world has led King Abdullah to strive to set a more independent course. The administration ‘thinks the Saudis are no longer behaving the role of the good vassal,’ said Steve Clemons, senior fellow and director of the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation. The Saudis, in turn, ‘see weakness, they see a void, and they’re going to fill the void and call their own shots.’

So angry is the US with what Saudi has been doing to destabilise the region and back Israel into a corner that it is rewarding Saudi with an $11 billion deal — and inviting it to discuss Israel’s future existence.

Madness.

It's Me... IN 2-D!!!

2007-08-01T12:52:00.000+03:00

Courtesy of Simpsonize Me

Technorati Tags: Simpsons

Welcoming You Home!!!

2007-07-31T12:53:00.000+03:00

Today, I went to my first Nefesh B'Nefesh welcoming ceremony. It was a very fun and moving experience despite having to wake up at 5:30 in the morning. I made Aliyah through NBN via their Express Aliyah after I already arrived, so I didn't participate in any big ceremony when I got here. It was a really fun experience. According to NBN, by the end of this year, they will have brought in 14,000 from North America and Britain. That is just amazing.

Being there was just so much fun. It was so amazing to share in the Aliyah experiences of over 200 people. It was overwhelming and emotional. Theres not much I can write, so I'll just share some pictures with you. Enjoy!! To my fellow Olim, Bruchim Habaim Habayta!!

OK, it seems blogger's picture uploading feature isn't working right now, so I'll get those pictures up later today.

Technorati Tags: Nefesh, B'Nefesh, Israel, Aliyah

Ridiculous Comment of the Iraq War

2007-07-27T08:18:00.000+03:00

On last night's Hannity & Colmes, Alan Colmes made a comment that the husband pointed out as completely ridiculous. It's a comment that has been used by the Democrats throughout the Iraq War in a digusting attempt to pretend they support the troops while constantly undermining them.

In response to Mark Levin's comment on how Democrats don't just NOT support the troops, they call them baby killers, terrorizers, and worse than the terrorists that brought them there, Alan Colmes said that he and the democracts support the troops by saying that they "want the troops out of harm's way". Before I go on, can you, the audience point out the obviousness ridiculousness of that statement?!? He wants the military out of harm's way, and that's how he supports them.

Last time I checked, it was exactly the JOB of the troops TO GET IN HARM'S WAY!! This is the analogy that the husband made that makes perfect sense. Should we fight to stop firefighters from going into burning buildings? That's dangerous. They're putting themselves in harm's way. Should we fight to stop police officers from trying to stop crimes, especially violent crimes where they could get themselves killed? They're putting themselves in harm's way. Here's the point. THEY'VE CHOSEN TO PUT THEMSELVES IN HARM'S WAY!! The American military is an all volunteer force. Everyone who is in there has CHOSEN to be there, with the full knowledge that they may be asked to put themselves in danger, and at the extreme, DIE for their country. They know this! A military's job isn't to get their nails done, or do "peace keeping", Even if it was, "peace keeping" is still dangerous, and you could still get yourself killed doing it.

To say that you want the troops out of harm's way is NOT supporting them, it's being completely ridiculous. If you really support the troops, you DON'T call them terrorizers, baby killers, or worse than the terrorists. If you don't support what they're fighting for, you support them by, either, shutting the hell up, or by just thanking them for doing a job that you won't do. I'll only say this once. Dissent is NOT the greatest form of patriotism. FIGHTING for and even DYING for your country is the greatest form of patriotism.

PUTTING YOURSELVES IN HARM'S WAY TO DEFEND YOUR COUNTRY'S BELIEFS AND CORE VALUES, THE VERY THINGS IT WAS FOUNDED ON; FIGHTING TO KEEP THE VERY POPULATION THAT CALLS YOU A BABY KILLER, SAFE IS THE GREATEST FORM OF PATRIOTISM. When you live in a country with free speech, it takes no risk to yourself to speak out against government policy. Nobody's going to come and arrest you or torture you for your speech and dissent. How can some-one say that dissent is the greatest form of patriotism when they live in country that guarantees free speech? No, it's just a ploy for the socialists and leftists to play the absolute moral authority card when they stand up and spit on the troops and call them the worst terrorists in the world. It's simply a tactic to look legitimate while smearing crap all of the very people ensuring that they can CONTINUE to smear crap on them in FREEDOM!

Senate Bows To The Will Of The People

2007-07-25T21:03:00.000+03:00

After the Senate voted, last week, against a John Doe Provision that would leave people who reported suspicious behavior open for prosecution have today caved to the will of the people. After the vote, many Senators who voted against the bill were lambasted for the vote and received thousands upon thousands of phone calls and emails from contituents that were angry with their vote.

In response, Republicans, like the writer of the Provision Pete King (R-NY), put the provision back on the table this week. And, the will of the people rang true. The Provision has PASSED this time. If you are dilegent and report suspicious behavior, your identity will be kept anonymous, and you will be safe from any type of prosecution, especially if your reported suspicions turn out to be false.

It's a great day for all of us working to prevent another terrorist attack on American soil!!

Fasting On Tisha B'Av

2007-07-24T12:50:00.000+03:00

Today is the day that we, as Jews, commemorate the destruction of the second Temple by fasting. We are also commemorating all the bad events that occurred to the Jewish people. It's a sad day. Normally I don't write about religious stuff because I don't always feel it's appropriate. But, something happened yesterday that made me want to comment on the day.

My family back in the States belongs to the Young Israel in their city. It models itself as a modern Orthodox Zionist synagogue. On Tisha B'Av, most synagogues have speeches and films that they show to commemorate the day. Next to Yom Kippur, it's the biggest fast day of the year. The only difference is that Tisha B'Av is not a holiday. You can do everyday stuff like drive your car, watch TV, etc. So, the synagogues take this opportunity to use other forms of media to teach lessons on the day. So, yesterday, my mom told me what the Young Israel was doing. The Rabbi was going to give a speech, and then they were going to show the documentary, "The Last Game". "The Last Game" is a documentary about the last basketball game between two high-school rivals from Gush Katif. It's a game that took place only days before the Disengagement took place. Then, after the documentary, a representative of AIPAC was coming to talk about the situation in Gaza today since the Disengagement.

OK, I think the documentary is awesome. It's very moving and important to see. But, on Tisha B'Av? Why? Why show a film that is destined to create nothing Sinat Chinam, baseless hate, on a day when we learned when that's EXACTLY what caused the destruction of the Temple? I objected to the showing of the film today. Apparently, my mother and a lot of other senior members of the synagogue have also objected to the showing of the film on a day like today, but the Rabbi has said that he's going to do what he wants and what he feels appropriate.

You know, and Jameel knows this, I am appalled and disgusted about what has happened to the evacuees since the Disengagement. But, I still think that, given the situation, the Disengagement was the right thing to do. But, that's a matter of policy. It's not a matter of theology. To show the documentary and then make comparisons that the Disengagement is akin to the destruction of the Temple is so disgustingly wrong, it almost makes me sick. How can you say that taking people out of their homes to save their lives is akin to destroying the Beit Hamikdash?!?

Here's an idea. Instead of discussing how the Disengagement was wrong, talk about helping the Gaza refugees! The Disengagement happened. Rehashing hatred toward the state of Israel for carrying it out is only detrimental to hurting the fabric of any unity between the Jewish people, which is precisely what we're supposed to be sewing on Tisha B'Av as we realize what we lost with Sinat Chinam. Helping the Jewish people would be better served if this synagogue would use this day to figure out a way to raise money to help the Gaza refugees. Many of them are still unemployed, and many of them are still living in caravillot and are still waiting for their next community and a permanent home. But, they won't do that.

This brings me to the next point I mentioned, which my mom totally agreed with. The community where I grew up just went through a big scandal with the local Kashrut Council. It was really bad, and it drove a huge wedge within the community, with everyone taking sides, and everyone forming their own opinions on the matter. It was nasty. I'm not going to go through it all, but it was not good. So, I told my mom that instead of talking about the problems and objections with another country's policies on Tisha B'Av, why don't they talk about what just happened within their own community and how they can mend the damage that was done. She totally agreed with me, but then said that the synagogue would never do that. I asked why. She said that if they talked about what happened, then the community would have to take a hard look and itself, and it would have to do some real introspective work where it would have to admit and try to correct its own wrongdoings. Yup, so it's better to discuss and trash on a whole other country, one in which none of them even live and know what's going on everyday, so they have the "objective" disconnect and impersonal Lashon Hara instead of looking at itself on a day when that's EXACTLY what you should be doing.

Bottom line, I think the synagogue should show the film and talk about the Disengagement. But, not on Tisha B'Av. Frankly, they shouldn't be rehashing and recycling the hatred and how Israel did the wrong thing, etc. Instead, they should be more constructive and discuss ways to help those that were evacuated from their homes. Most importantly, it is extremely detrimental to take an event that was decided on democratically to protect part of the population and compare it to the expulsion of the Jews from Israel and the destruction of the Temple by the Romans. They are in no way comparable and to make it correlate is very dangerous.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Young+Israel, Tisha, B'Av, Fast, Disengagement, Gaza

Stupid Comment Of The Week

2007-07-23T20:23:00.000+03:00

Courtesy of Harry Reid, the Senate Majority leader, on Face The Nation:
"We should go after these evil people wherever they are. Where-ever they are, we should go get them. As a matter of fact, the invasion of Iraq was the worst foreign policy blunder in the history of the country. It has created a haven for Al-Queada that didn't exist before the invasion, but we should go after them where-ever they are."

Wait, a second, Mr. Reid, let me get this straight. You state that we should go after the terrorists where-ever they are, then you go on to say that invading Iraq was a horrific mistake. Iraq has become the haven for the terrorists, yet you want us out of there, yet, simultaneously, you want us to go after them where-ever they are. But, if they're in Iraq, even if for the sake of argument we say they weren't there before our invasion, shouldn't we go after them there and NOT withdraw??? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Technorati Tags: Iraq, Al-Queda, Terrorst, Harry+Reid

Back From Hiatus And Happy To Be In Israel

2007-07-23T11:19:00.000+03:00

I haven't written or posted anything in almost 2 weeks. Like any other blogger who doesn't get over 100 viewers a day, I do this for my own amusement, pleasure, and venting. Therefore, there are times when the "inspiration" for blogging leaves me for a little bit. But, now I'm back.

I've lived in Israel for 2.5 years now. However, it's only until recently that I've actually been happy that I'm not currently living in the United States. It started a little bit when the Democrats took control of Congress and when into full force when the Immigration Reform Bill, or "Shamnesty Bill" as I like to call it, was introduced to the American people. Now, it is on full boil.

It is official. America is back in 9/10 mode. If some U.S. city is NOT attacked within the next year, I will be extremely surprised. I have to admit something. I watch 9/11 documentaries on a semi-regular basis. It's not because I'm a morbid person that's obsessed with such a horrific event. I lived in New York city for 5 years. I was there on 9/11. I don't have to watch any TV program to remember that day. I saw the pictures for myself. The reason I watch these things is to remind myself; to remind myself what happened, what went wrong, and what we continue to stand to lose if we don't fix the problems and mentality that was held before those building were struck.

Alas, not everyone feels the same way I do. Worst of all, the very people charged with protecting and defending me and every American citizen has lost all sense of what really happened on that day. It's become business as usual. What am I talking about? This past week, the Senate voted down the John Doe Provision, which would make it illegal to prosecute any person or persons that came forward to report suspicious behavior to authorities. Let me make it clear. THEY VOTED AGAINST IT!! This means that if you're on an airplane or on a subway or work in a video store or just plain walking down the street, and you see behavior that scares you or seems suspicious, and you go and report it to the police or FBI or whoever, the person you reported has the RIGHT to sue you or bring legal action against you. The young man who works at Best Buy who reported the Jihad training video to the authorities, the young man who single handedly played a vital role in stopping the Fort Dix terrorist plot, him? The men arrested can SUE him for "racial profiling"!!

The Senate has just made the country a must less safe and weaker place to be! How is THIS a bipartisan issue?!? Can someone please explain it to me?!? We already have a law like this on the books, and no-one has yet to scream racial profiling in relation to it. What law you ask? It's called The Good Samaritan Law, which states that if you report an alleged crime taking place, you don't have to give your name, and you won't be forced to testify. It's meant to encourage people to report crimes without fear or any sort of repercussions. Well, that seems logical enough.

So, why is it that when it comes to protecting American citizens against terrorist attacks and, likewise, encourage people to be on the forefront of terrorist prevention, our government has slapped us in the face and said that they protect the terrorists rather than us?!? If you hesitate to report suspicious activity because you're afraid that some ambulance chasing lawyer will sue you for your diligence, who will come forward to protect us?

Here's a simple 9/11 example which could have prevented Mohammad Atta from getting on American Airlines Flight 11 and crashing the first plane into the North Tower of the World Trade Center. The ticket agent in the Maine airport that Atta flew out of on the morning of 9/11 stated that Atta looked suspicious and had such a disgusted look of anger on his face that the agent was contemplating letting him through. Now, I'm in no way blaming the ticket agent of anything. The 9/11 plot should have and could have been stopped well in advance had the current PATRIOT Act been in place pre-9/11. However, if the agent had reported Atta's suspicious behavior to the authorities, things may have turned out differently. Let's fast forward to today and say another Atta comes through our gates, and the agent doesn't report the guy; not because he doesn't know any better and nothing like 9/11 had ever happened before but because he's AFRAID THE GUY WILL SUE HIM IS HE'S WRONG! Don't think it would happen? That's exactly what happened with the "Flying Imams" case.

An ARABIC speaking man reported these 6 "Imams" behaving suspiciously on a flight. They were speaking in Arabic about Jihad and the U.S. invasion of Iraq. They also moved around in an extremely suspicious way. Other passengers also reported this suspicious behavior. When these claims became public, the Imams along with Islamic front groups like CAIR came forward and accused the passengers or racial profiling and attempted to sue all the John Does, or unnamed passengers. The case was thrown out. However, instead of being congratulated for their diligence and courage to speak up when they saw something that looked suspicious, the Demcoratically controlled Senate has now made a bold and frightening statement. "If you see suspicious behavior, DON'T REPORT IT. Sit there, keep your mouth shut, hope and pray it's not a terrorist act, lest you open yourself up to be sued for all your worth and be branded a racist xenophobe."

I'll leave you with a chilling comment an anti-terrorist FBI agent said to Steven Emmerson. I'll have to paraphrase it because I don't remember the exact words. He said to Steve that it took a 9/11 to wake up America to what was going in the world. Then, he said, "You know what? I'm afraid it's going to take another 9/11." Why? Because people have short memories, and they've already become complacent. Actually, more the government, especially the Democrats, than the American people. I truly believe that the majority of the American people are ready and willing to do their part to prevent another terrorist attack from occurring on American soil. It is the government that has reverted back to its pre-9/11 thinking where National Security is secondary from securing the resources and votes of certain special interest groups, where fulfilling their sworn duty to protect and defend the Constitution and the people from all enemies; foreign AND domestic comes second to party politics.

It's a sad time for America.

Technorati Tags: America, United+States, 9/11, Islam, Muslim, Imam, Democrat, Congress, Senate

Melanie Phillips Also Comments On The Government That Dare Not Speak Its Name

2007-07-11T11:01:00.000+03:00

(Reprinted from E-mail)

Britain’s war against…well, you know
USA Today, 10 July 2007

Britain is now fighting a war it dares not name. The recent failed car bomb attacks on a London nightclub and Glasgow airport demonstrated once again that Britain is a principal target for al-Qaeda. But even now, the British response is dangerously confused.

After eight people in the medical profession were arrested over these attacks, there was widespread shock that those who cure should also want to kill. This naive and ahistorical reaction demonstrated yet again the extraordinary state of denial about the Islamist jihad. After all, Osama bin Laden’s sidekick, Ayman al-Zawahri, is a doctor. So are other Islamist terrorists, including Mahmoud Zahar, the Hamas strongman in Gaza.

But because the deeply empirical British do not understand how religious fanaticism twists the human mind, they tell themselves that Islamic terrorism must be driven by rational grievances such as deprivation, ‘Islamophobia’ or British foreign policy.

Many continue to believe that Britain is a target because of its involvement in Iraq. While the war is undoubtedly used to whip up hysteria in the Muslim world, the irrationality of believing that it is the cause of Islamic terror is clearly demonstrated by the fact that British Muslims who have been jailed for terrorist offenses were recruited even before 9/11. Al-Qaeda is also heavily engaged in places such as Indonesia or Africa, which have no connection to Iraq or the Middle East.

In Britain, all these grievance excuses are wearing very thin, thanks to the recent emergence of former jihadists who have renounced their extremism.

Ed Husain, in his book The Islamist, and another former radical, Hassan Butt, have made the case that the doctrines to which they once subscribed are rooted in nothing other than a fanatical desire to Islamize the world.

But while these courageous people are telling Britain that, far from being motivated by despair, Islamist terrorists kill as an act of religious exultation, the new prime minister, Gordon Brown, has banned his ministers from using the word ‘Muslim’ — and presumably ‘Islamic’ or ‘Islamist’ — in connection with the terrorist crisis. He has also put an end to the phrase ‘war on terror.’

Accordingly, in her statement to Parliament about the attacks, the new home secretary, Jacqui Smith, referred to them as ‘criminal’ acts rather than Islamic terrorism and talked about ‘communities’ that are involved rather than Muslims.

For those in the coalition of the willing who have been nervous about how Brown’s leadership will differ from that of Tony Blair, such a signal is deeply alarming. How can Brown talk about winning a battle of ideas — when he is not even prepared to name the central idea that is driving the terrorism?

This is a disastrous misjudgment, and not merely because a society cannot possibly defend itself against a threat it is not even willing to identify. More seriously still, it means the British government is pandering to the refusal by most British Muslims to acknowledge that Islamist terrorism is rooted in their religion and that this is a problem with which they must themselves deal.

Because it is not enough for them to condemn terrorism. They must also repudiate, publicly and authoritatively, those parts of their religion that mandate hatred of the unbeliever and holy war. The Brown government’s censorship of language lets them off that crucial hook and, by signaling its own moral and intellectual weakness, emboldens the radicals.

Brown’s failure of nerve is being reflected in the USA, too. Despite President Bush’s aggressive rhetoric about the ‘war on terror,’ he has in fact fluctuated wildly over identifying religious fanaticism as the central driver of the problem. After 9/11, he said ‘Islam is peace.’ And although for a period he started referring to ‘Islamic extremism’ and even ‘Islamo-fascism,’ he recently sounded a full retreat when he appointed an American special envoy to the deeply Islamist and anti-western Organization of the Islamic Conference. With such an instinct on both sides of the Atlantic to appease Islamist fanaticism, the ‘war on terror’ becomes an empty sound bite as the West advertises its weakness to the enemy.

Undoubtedly, the latest attacks upon Britain were designed to test the will of the new British prime minister. His censorship of the language, however, was far from the only indication of a disturbing weakening of that will. For he has brought into his government a string of people who were opposed to the Iraq war, thus signaling a distancing from the United States — and opening up an exceptionally dangerous crack in what should be a staunchly united alliance in time of war.

Such new ministers include Foreign Secretary David Miliband, who blamed Israel in last year’s Lebanon war; the new higher education minister, John Denham, who resigned from the Blair administration over Iraq; and most startling of all, the new second in command at the Foreign Office, Sir Mark Malloch Brown, a former United Nations official who has downplayed the U.N. “oil for food” scandal and condemned the United States over the Iraq war.

Britain has never been in a more dangerous position — not just because of terrorism but because, faced with an enemy whose platform is the decadence and weakness of the West, it is going out of its way to prove the terrorists right.

Technorati Tags: Britain, Terrorism, Terrorist, Islam, Muslim, Brown, Terror

Don't Shoot, I'm On Your Side!!

2007-07-10T08:48:00.000+03:00

(Reprinted from E-mail)
JIHAD WATCH July 7, 2007
Fitzgerald: Alan Johnston and the BBC, as morally unkempt as ever

"When I was captured...I told them not to kill me, I am on your side." (Alan Johnston, in an interview)

Johnston has been a terrible reporter from Gaza, and he shows every sign of continuing to refuse to comprehend, or even to recognize, the evil that is in front of his face. He was a tool, a tool when a free reporter, a tool when captured, a tool now that he has been freed -- a tool of Fatah, and then a tool of a particular local clan, and finally, a tool of Hamas, attempting to burnish its image.

And the entire BBC effort to "free Alan Johnston" was blatantly based on an appeal to the "Palestinians" to free him not because he should never have been taken in the first place, not because he was a journalist, but because he was so "friendly" to the Arab cause, so intent on "telling their story," so firmly in their camp. I collected a dozen or so examples of this transparent semaphoring -- the BBC's public admission, by executive after executive, of Alan Johnson's "value" to the "Palestinians" as their propagandist ("telling their story to the world"). In other words, the BBC admitted publicly, but only because it had to, it felt, in order to free him, to the very things which others have charged the BBC with, as part of its systematic anti-Israel and pro-Arab, pro-Muslim bias. Had Alan Johnston never been taken hostage, the BBC would not only never have admitted to these things, but would have stoutly, even indignantly, denied them.

Might the BBC somehow be taken to task by members of Parliament? By Charles Moore? Has anyone noticed that the BBC of Huw Weldon is not the present-day BBC? It is not only a question of atrocious accents and constant misuse (and mispronunciation) of English, not to mention the shrillness of the Judy Swallows, and the palpable nastiness both in her voice and in that of Lyse Doucet. Could we not have some of those well-modulated voices of yesteryear, or are they as rare in England as they are now in the United States? The speech of radio announcers ought to be a model of mellifluousness, not grating -- as Judy Swallow grates -- on ear and in every other way.

The BBC is bad. The BBC World Service, which answers not to Bush House but to the Foreign Office and its Arabists, is even worse.

Think of all the Muslim personnel. Are they known for taking even a pretend stab at objectivity, anywhere they may be? Think of Robin Lustig, or that Mr. Bennett-Jones who loves to grill those he regards with hostility (you should have heard his nasty treatment of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, but she held her own, and then some).

The BBC, you will recall, has as its World Affairs Editor a certain John Simpson. To truly understand the antisemitic and anti-American and for that matter anti-British BBC World Service, you must find out about Simpson, the man who has described Rafsanjani, that monster, as a "moderate." Possibly the way that Goebbels was a "moderate" compared to Hitler, or Beria to Stalin. Simpson is a key figure in the IslamIntern -- along with Edward Mortimer and Mona Rishmawi, the Palestinian Arab behind Mary Robinson.

Simpson is a good friend of the anti-Israel conspiracy theorist, and promoter of Mordecai Vanunu, Peter Hounam. Hounam wrote a book called something like "The Cyanide Conspiracy" -- about "Zionists" in the American government and so on. A book not out of place at any Nazi webpage. Simpson liked the book so much he wrote an introduction to it. Ca dit longue, John Simpson's involvement in this favorite treatment of the American antisemites' favorite topic -- why, he is just the man to run the BBC World Services. So the next time you have to endure the sneers and snarls directed at Israel from Judy Swallow, Robin Lustig, et al -- do make sure to direct some of your ire at John Simpson, No. 3 at the BBC.

So now Johnston is out. And it's the mixture as before, for brave little Alan Johnston. He may have had a shower and a shave and a haircut after his "terrifying ordeal" (which ordeal is par for the "Palestinian" and Arab Muslim course, but Alan Johnston isn't focussing on that -- Alan Johnston is focussed entirely on...Alan Johnston), but he remains as morally unkempt as ever.

The Government That Dare Not Speak Its Name

2007-07-09T12:03:00.000+03:00

The Adventures of Tony Rodef, Middle East Detective: The London Caper
Barry Rubin
July 8, 2007

News item: After suicide bomb attacks on London and Glasgow by Islamists were foiled, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown ordered ministers never to use the word “Muslim” when discussing terrorism.

It was a dark and stormy night in London, which is just as well since my arrival was supposed to be a top secret. I was picked up at Heathrow Airport by a limousine and driven immediately to Number 10 Downing Street. I had been called in by a government frustrated about what might well be the biggest mystery in British history. Gordon Brown was certainly glad to see me. “Tony Rodef, Middle East Detective! Just the man we need,” he said with a sigh of relief. “Quick, this is a major crisis. Let’s not waste any time but go straight to the briefing.”

We entered the prime minister’s briefing room and he introduced me to Moss, “Our top man on terrorism,” explained Brown.

“Moss?” I pondered. “Haven’t we met before.”
“Perhaps, sir, until last week I was in charge of stopping the import of stale vegetables from Central America.”
“Ah, yes. Do you like your new job?”
“Certainly,” he beamed. “Stale vegetables, detecting terrorists; it’s all the same thing, you see.”
“Quite.”
“Now, here’s the first slide, September 11, 2001. A group of terrorists, mostly from Saudi Arabia, hijack planes and attack New York and Washington. Why might they have done such a thing? Hard to tell. But it gets even more mysterious.”

And so it went. Slide after slide. Bombs in Spain; bombs in Bali; bombs in Israel; bombs in the London subway. Six years of terrorism, often using the same methods.

“And finally,” Moss said showing the last slide, “the latest attacks in Britain. People from Iraq, Jordan, you know countries in your part of the world.”
I nodded. “So what’s the problem?”
“Ah,” said the prime minister, “that’s the point. We are trying to figure out who these people are and why they are doing this. We sort of suspect we might have done something to hurt their feelings.”
“I see.”
“Yes,” Brown continued. “We just cannot figure it out. Some of these people are Arabs but others are not. They come from lots of different countries. They often refer to someone named Al or Allah. Some are rich and some are poor. Some are common laborers; others are doctors. But what do they have in common? What’s linking them together?”
“Have you tried using James Bond?”
“He’s in semi-retirement now as a multicultural tolerance counselor in Manchester. So instead we have Philby who is heading our research section.”
“Philby?” pondered I. Haven’t we met before?”
“Yes, sir. Up until last week I was in charge of passing secret information to the Russians. Er, I mean collecting secret information on the Russians.”

Philby gave his briefing. They had run every known fact about the terrorists through the most advanced computers. The most promising correlations were height and the number of letters in their first names. They were all right-handed, a potentially promising lead. They didn’t eat pork or practice bungee-jumping.

“Is that all?” I asked Philby.
“Well there’s one more thing. All of them are Mu…Mu…Mu….”
“You’ll have to forgive Philby. He has a slight stutter.”
“Thank you, sir,” Philby gasped. “I meant to say that all of them are moustached men.”
“Moustaches, huh,” I retorted. “Perhaps that means something. A disguise perhaps?” I pondered some more. “So let me get this straight,” I summarized. “You have a bunch of men from a lot of countries running around setting off bombs for no apparent reason who are roughly the same height, have roughly the same number of letters in one of their names, don’t eat pork, and don’t jump off platforms with a cord attached to one of their legs.”
“That’s about it, sir,” said Philby. “Oh, and they go to mosques a lot and read religious literature in Arabic.”
“Philby!” the prime minister recoiled in horror.
“Sorry, sir. I meant to say they are sort of religious. But we’ve ruled that out as a motive.”
“A real puzzler,” I sighed.
“Look,” said the prime minister. “You must understand that solving this problem is of the greatest importance. We must find out who these people are, what they believe, why they are doing this, and how to counter them. The fate of our country depends on it. Nothing can stand in the way of our finding out what is going on!”
“I understand completely, prime minister,” I said in a properly deferential and sympathetic voice. “I, Tony Rodef, Middle East Detective am on the job. And if there is any common factor that links these people together I’m sure we will find it.”
“Money is no object,” he said emphatically. ”Now you must excuse me as I need to meet with the Muslim community leadership which is declaring its revulsion at these events.” We all stood up. “And remember if you find anything behind this wave of attacks you must let me know immediately.”
“Yes, prime minister,” we all said in chorus.

Barry Rubin is Director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, Interdisciplinary Center university. His latest book, The Truth about Syria was published by Palgrave-Macmillan in May 2007. Prof.
http://www.amazon.com/Truth-about-Syria-Barry-Rubin/dp/1403982732/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-6714642-3015149?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1177690586&sr=1-1
Rubin's columns can be read online at: http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html.

Technorati Tags: Britain, London, Gordon+Brown, Terrorist, Terrorism, Islam, Muslim, Middle+East

In Light of Recent Terrorist Attacks In Europe, Threat Levels Are Raised

2007-07-06T08:03:00.000+03:00

(Reprinted from E-mail)
The terrorist threat in Europe is so bad that:

The English are feeling the pinch in relation to recent terrorist threats and have raised their security level from "Miffed" to "Peeved." Soon, though, security levels may be raised yet again to "Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross." Londoners have not been "A Bit Cross" since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies all but ran out. Terrorists have been re-categorized from "Tiresome" to a "Bloody Nuisance." The last time the British issued a "Bloody Nuisance" warning level was during the great fire of 1666.

Also, the French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in France are "Surrender" and "Collaborate." The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively paralyzing the country's military capability.

It's not only the English and French that are on a heightened level of alert. Italy has increased the alert level from "Shout Loudly and Excitedly" to "Elaborate Military Posturing." Two more levels remain: "Ineffective Combat Operations" and "Change Sides." The Germans also increased their alert state from "Disdainful Arrogance" to "Dress in Uniform and Sing Marching Songs." They also have two higher levels: "Invade a Neighbor" and "Lose."

Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual, and the only threat they are worried about is NATO pulling out of Brussels.

The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready to deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the new Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.

Happy Independence Day America!!

2007-07-04T09:07:00.000+03:00

I may be an Israeli, but I still am and always will be a proud American. I consider myself extremely lucky to have lived and been raised in the United States. America is the greatest country in the world.

GOD BLESS AMERICA AND ALL THOSE WHO HAVE SACRIFICED THEIR LIVES AND CONTINUE TO SACRIFICE THEIR LIVES TO KEEP AMERICA FREE!!

God Bless America
Words and music by Irving Berlin
© Copyright 1938, 1939 by Irving Berlin

God Bless America,
Land that I love.
Stand beside her, and guide her
Thru the night with a light from above.
From the mountains, to the prairies,
To the oceans, white with foam
God bless America, My home sweet home.

I've Been MEMED!!!

2007-07-02T18:42:00.000+03:00

Irina memed me. I haven't done one of these things in a while, so I guess it's a little fun to do one.

Each player lists 8 facts/habits about themselves. The rules of the game are posted at the beginning before those facts/habits are listed. At the end of the post, the player then tags 8 people and posts their names, then goes to their blogs and leaves them a comment, letting them know that they have been tagged and asking them to read your blog.

1) Watching Friends is like comfort food for me when I'm sick. When I'm sick, nothing on TV interests me. The only thing I want to watch when I'm sick is Friends.

2) Both of my index fingers are double-jointed, and it's a nervous habit of mine to bend them in weird ways. I can't really describe it right, but it does freak people out when they see it. It's so much fun!

3) My biggest pet peeve are peoples' feet. Summer time is the worst. I can't stand people who wear sandals but don't bother to groom their feet. The worst is people who, at the very least, don't cut their toe nails. Eeeew!

4) I know most people know this about me, but thinking of 8 facts or habits I don't care about the entire blogosphere know is hard. I'm a huge hockey freak. I love the Detroit Red Wings, but I will watch any hockey game that's on and follow the game religiously. The husband has learned to live with it.

5) It's funny, but I only really learned to love and appreciate watching baseball AFTER I moved to Israel. I liked watching it when I was a kid then couldn't stand it all through my teen years, but now I really love watching it.

6) On my left arm, I have freckles that look like a crab or lobster, depending on how you see it. It's like a little Rorschach ink spot that I like to call my natural tattoo.

7) Like Irina, I'm a huge procrastinator. Umm... I'm writing this meme instead of writing a paper that's due in less that 2 weeks. HELLO!!

8) I've kinda sorta gotten addicted to Facebook, and I don't care who knows it. I'M NOT ASHAMED! Actually, does anyone know any help groups....?

OK, I tag:
-Shu
-Am Echad
-Chai18
-michael
-Brian
-Shlemazl
-Chaim
-Abbagav

If You're A Vonage Customer, You HAVE TO READ THIS!

2007-07-02T00:05:00.000+03:00

First, Vonage is sued by Verizon for stealing their patents. Now this!

EEOC Files Discrimination Suit Vs Vonage
Associated Press 06.26.07, 6:00 PM ET

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued Vonage Holdings Corp. on Tuesday, alleging the company discriminated against a Jewish employee by failing to accommodate his need for religious observances.

In a lawsuit filed in federal court in Newark, N.J., the EEOC alleges Vonage and its Vonage America Inc. unit didn't allow Mikhail Rozenberg, an Orthodox Jew, to participate in training because he had to miss time to observe Jewish holidays in fall 2005 and didn't accommodate his request for a schedule where he didn't work on Saturdays in order to observe the Sabbath.

Rozenberg, who was hired as a technical service agent in September 2005, was eventually terminated because of his religion, according to the lawsuit.

"Defendants' management representative told Rozenberg, 'You will not fit here,' and that when he stopped practicing his religion, he could come back," the lawsuit alleges.

The complaint said Rozenberg wasn't allowed to participate in a required six-week training program because he had to miss time to observe Jewish holidays in September and October 2005. Other employees were allowed to be absent from the training sessions if they provided proper documentation, according to the complaint.

The Holmdel, N.J.-based telecommunications company also failed to offer Rozenberg other positions he was qualified for in the fall and winter of 2005 and told him in December 2005 that the only positions available were those that required him to work on Saturdays, according to the lawsuit.

"This is an egregious case of religious discrimination," Spencer H. Lewis Jr., director of the EEOC's New York office, said in a statement. "No one should be told that they can work only when they stop practicing their religion. This is a classic example of how an employer could have accommodated an employee's religious beliefs at no cost, but chose the more costly route of discrimination."

A Vonage spokesman declined comment Tuesday.

Abu Mazen Makes An Interesting Confession

2007-06-29T13:14:00.000+03:00

(Hat Tip: Yid With Lid)

Mahmoud Abbas is under a lot of pressure...I guess thats why he made the big boo-boo. You see it has aways been the Palestinian position that they were the first and original residents of the holy land. True that argument is a ton of lard, and only mentioned as a way to delegitimatize the Jewish claim on Israel--but you wouldn't believe how many crazies in the world buy their tall tale.

Last week I was so taken aback by Abbas' statement that he refused to negotiate with terrorists, that I totally missed Abbas little comment in the same speech which put a damper on the "first come first served" argument. He was talking about the Hamas destruction of a church in Gaza:

One of the oldest churches in Palestine, which stood long before our arrival [in the region], was looted and set on fire. There are Christians among us, and they are our brothers, and now we discover that [according to Hamas] they are enemies and must leave [ Palestine]?!

Mahmoud if the Christains were there befor you....and the Jews were the before the Christians its simple math 1+2=you are a liar. Kuddos to the ZOA for pointing Aboo-Boo Mazen's mistake.

BBC Trying To Cover Up Their Hamas Employees

2007-06-27T23:08:00.000+03:00

The Hamas Broadcasting Corporation
Posted By Melanie Phillips On June 27, 2007 @ 1:03 pm In Diary | Comments Disabled

So now we know why the BBC sounds like the voice of Hamas. It is Hamas. A story in the Jerusalem Post all but throws away the following explosive revelation:

Despite Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) opposition and per the request of the BBC, the coordinator of government activities allowed a Hamas member who works for the BBC to enter the Gaza Strip last week to assist in efforts to release kidnapped journalist Alan Johnston. Defense officials told The Jerusalem Post that a week ago, a request came from the BBC asking that a Palestinian employee of the news company who is believed to be a close associate of senior Hamas officials be allowed to enter Gaza. The employee, who lives in Gaza, had traveled to Egypt with his wife for medical reasons and the BBC told Israeli officials that they believed he could assist in negotiating Johnston’s release. The Shin Bet objected to the BBC request, saying that the employee was actually a member of Hamas, and perhaps even a terrorist operative.

The BBC has denied that its employees are members of Hamas:

‘We deny that our members are employees of Hamas,’ [sic] Simon Wilson, Jerusalem’s BBC Bureau Chief told the Post. In a statement, the BBC said, ‘Like all large international organizations, the BBC regularly seeks the assistance of the Israeli authorities in moving its Palestinian staff in and out of Gaza. The BBC does not employ anyone who is a member of Hamas or any other Palestinian faction.’

Hmnn. Note the uses of the words ‘employ’ and ‘employees’. It may well be that this man is not on the staff of the BBC and is therefore technically not an employee. Indeed, it is most likely that he is a stringer, one of the many freelance journalists that the BBC uses for its reporting from Gaza. But that is a semantic weasel. It makes no difference to the central claim made by the Post’s story, that the supposedly dispassionate BBC is using to supply its supposedly dispassionate reporting from Gaza a Palestinian who is a member of Hamas, a terrorist organisation proscribed by Britain, the US and the EU and which is committed to the destruction of Israel, the murder of Jews everywhere and the Islamist takeover of the world.

So is it true? The BBC must now tell us, immediately, exactly who this Palestinian is and what work he does for it. Otherwise we must assume that the Post’s story is correct. If that is so, it underlines once again that the BBC has become a fifth column in our society that must with the utmost urgency be addressed.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Gaza, BBC, Hamas, Alan, Johnston, Britain

Israel Quietly Taking in Thousands of Darfur Refugees

2007-06-27T22:53:00.000+03:00

I'll make this short and sweet. While the rest of the Western world, especially Europe, is thumbing their noses up their butts about the dire situation in Darfur, Sudan, Israel has actually been taking action to help the people being raped and murdered. While Great Britain is busy planning their boycott against Israeli goods and academia, Israel has somehow become the refuge for those in need from Darfur. And, you know what? Israel is accepting these refugees with open arms. For some reason and somehow, these third world destitutes that have lived their lives with no running water, electricity, or Television with the threat of death hanging over their heads every single day somehow heard that ISRAEL is the place that will accept them, take care of them, and shield them from harm. Tonight, Channel 2 news announced that HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of Darfur refugees are risking their lives to get here.

Think about it. Think about where these people are coming from. They are literally WALKING from Eastern Africa under threat of death to Israel for salvation. That's right. The racist Apartheid country is accepting thousands of black Africans. NO-ONE ELSE HAS TAKEN THEM IN. THEY'RE NOT TURNING TO ANYONE ELSE FOR HELP EXCEPT FOR ISRAEL! OH YEAH, AND ONE MORE THING. WHILE THE BRITISH ARE THUMBING THEIR MORAL NOSES AT US, WE'RE ACTUALLY HELPING THOSE IN NEED. What are the British doing? Oh yeah, that's right, NOTHING.

When it comes right down to it, no-one cares what a bunch of British and Euro-trash pseudo-intellectuals have to say about Israel. All that matters are those thousands of desperate people in need that have turned to Israel for help and got it.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Darfur, Sudan, Refugee, Great+Britain, Britain, Boycott

365 Days Later, Shalit's Voice Is Heard

2007-06-25T15:29:00.000+03:00

As a sick ploy in commemoration of a year since Gilad Shalit was kidnapped into Gaza, Hamas has released an audio of a message sent from Shalit to his parents. It's breaking news now. Here's what we know:
- Hamas releasing the tape proves what we've all known all along, but what the West and the MSM has done their best to hide. Regardless of which Terrorist group took Shalit hostage, Hamas was either a collaborator or, at the very least, knew full well what was going on and was fully complicit in his capture.
- It's not known whether this tape was made recently. For all we know, it could have been made a year ago. It might not even be Gilad. What is known is that Hamas is aiming to make a play in light of their total takeover of Gaza. Some analysts are seeing this as a week move by Hamas; saying that Hamas is desperate now to solidify their position and want to make a good PR move to brighten the picture from the past weeks' killings, executions, and general blood bathy merriment. They say that their position is proven by the amount and type of prisoners that are now being requested for the trade; 400 and mostly minor prisoners like many that are under 18. Other analysts say that this is a move to make Hamas even stronger and to prove to the world that they are in complete and total control of Gaza, and if the world wants to deal with any Palestinian leaders, it will have to be HAMAS. This might be why Shalit's tape was released within a day of Alan Johnston's new video tape.
- It's obvious that this is a scripted message. For all of you who aren't being appraised of what the message included, here it is:
- He sent a greeting to his family and friends. He told them he misses them very much.
- He apologized for the government of Israel and IDF not being very interested in dealing with those that took him captive and capitulating to their demands, especially since he was serving in the Army and wasn't a drug dealer.
- He says that he's spend a full year in prison, and hi medical situation continues to deteriorate and that he needs extensive medical care and hospitalization.
- He says that just like he has parents, thousands of Palestinians also have parents who want their sons home.
- He says that he's sure that the government will take more of an interest in listening and following the demands of the Mujahadeen in order to bring him home.
- With that, he said goodbye by simply saying "Corporal Gilad Shalit".
- Gilad's father, Noam, heard the message for the first time on Channel 2 and says that it does sound like his son't voice.
- Right now, the Security Cabinet is having an emergency meeting about the situation. PM Olmert has already arrived at the Sharm e' Sheikh summit in Egypt, so we don't really have any response from him at this time.

If things pick up or develop, I'll be sure to report them. I've seen what Fox news is reporting, so you're not really getting everything. Stay tuned....

Technorati Tags: Gilad, Shalit, Hamas, Gaza, IDF, Israel, Olmert, Egypt, Palestinian, Captive

Close Friend Of Daniel Pearl Ashamed of "A Mighty Heart"

2007-06-24T23:46:00.000+03:00

(Hat Tip: Hot Air)

A Mighty Shame
It's the Story of Our Search for Danny Pearl. But in This Movie, He's Nowhere to Be Found.

By Asra Q. Nomani
Sunday, June 24, 2007; Page B01

On Wednesday, Jan. 23, 2002, I stood at the gate of my rented house in Karachi, watching my friend Danny Pearl juggle a notebook, cellphone and earpiece as he bounded over to a taxicab idling in the street. He was off to try to find the alleged al-Qaeda handler of "shoe bomber" Richard Reid in Pakistan. "Good luck, dude," I called, waving cheerfully as he strode off, a lopsided grin on his face. His pregnant wife, Mariane, stood smiling and waving beside me as the taxi pulled away. A gaggle of parrots swooped through the trees above, squawking in the late afternoon sun.

That was the last image I had of Danny until late last month, when a PR executive for Paramount Vantage pulled up to my house in Morgantown, W.Va., in a black Lincoln Town Car. She was carrying a DVD of "A Mighty Heart," the just-released movie, based on the book by Mariane Pearl, about the staggering events that unfolded after that innocuous moment in Pakistan: Danny's kidnapping and eventual beheading.

With my parents and a friend beside me, I pressed "play" on my DVD player and settled in to watch. Slowly, as the scenes ticked by, my heart sank. I could live with having been reduced from a colleague of Danny's to a "charming assistant" to Mariane, as one review put it, and even with having been cut out of the scene in front of my house in Pakistan. That's the creative license Hollywood takes. What I couldn't accept was that Danny himself had been cut from his own story.

The character I saw on the screen was flat -- nerdy, bland and boring. He's not at all like Danny, who wrote "ditties" about Osama bin Laden while he was investigating Pakistan's nuclear secrets and jihadist groups as a reporter for the Wall Street Journal. On screen, he's warned three times to meet with Sheik Mubarik Ali Gilani -- the man with whom he thought he had an interview -- only in public. But off he goes, ignoring the warnings. The message: Reckless journalist.

That was nothing like the Danny I knew. As the credits rolled, I murmured to my mother, "Danny had a cameo in his own murder." READ THE REST...

For me, watching the movie was like having people enter my home, rearrange the furniture and reprogram my memory. I'd known it was a gamble when I agreed to help with a Hollywood version of Danny's kidnapping, but I'd done it because I thought the movie had the potential to be meaningful. I'd hoped it could honor the man I'd worked alongside for nine years at the Journal by explaining why he was so passionate about his work as a reporter. I'd hoped that it would tell the story of the unique team of law enforcement agents, government officials and journalists -- of varying religions, nationalities and cultures -- that had searched for him. And I hoped it could spark a search for the truth behind Danny's death.

But the moviemakers and their PR machine seemed intent on two very different and much shallower goals: creating a mega-star vehicle for Angelina Jolie, who plays Mariane, and promoting the glib and cliched idea that both Danny and Mariane were "ordinary heroes."

I think Danny would have rolled his eyes at that.

In the prologue to her book, Mariane wrote to her son: "I write this book for you, Adam, so you know that your father was not a hero but an ordinary man." In a movie voiceover, that dedication becomes: "This film is for our son so he knows that his father was an ordinary man. An ordinary hero."

But there weren't any real heroes in the story of Danny's tragedy. Danny would have said he was just doing his job. When he went off that day in Karachi, he didn't give any impression that he thought what he was doing was especially dangerous. He just had a story he wanted to pursue and an interview he thought would help him. After he vanished, I don't think any of us, not even Mariane, did anything particularly courageous, either. We each had a duty to try to find him -- either as professionals or because of the bonds of friendship or family.

I know that movies need a dramatic arc and that there has to be room for artistic license in the telling of a true story, because reality is often so chaotic. I know that it's natural to search for a compelling narrative structure to make sense of tragedy and pointlessness. And I do believe that Danny's last moments, as he declared his Jewishness for his kidnappers' video camera, showed his strength of character.

But recasting a story just so we can tell ourselves that we've found a hero is too easy. It's the quickest way to convince ourselves that what happened wasn't such a bad thing, that it had redeeming value, that we can close the book on it and move on with our lives. We do it too often -- with television shows about ordinary people with extraordinary powers, with magazine features that extol the "heroes among us" and with our impulse to elevate every story -- think Jessica Lynch, ambushed and wounded in Iraq -- to one of heroism.

For me, "A Mighty Heart" and all the hype surrounding it have only underscored how cheap and manufactured our quest for heroism has become. Paramount even launched an "ordinary hero" contest to promote the movie. "Nominate the most inspiring ordinary hero," its Web site shouts. "Win a trip to the Bahamas!"

Lost in the PR machine and the heroism hoopla is Danny, whose death is at the center of the story. After all, as one person involved in the production candidly told me: Danny can't do interviews. So in the Associated Press review, he amounts to nothing more than a parenthetical phrase.

But Danny was not parenthetical. He deserves to be remembered fully. He was charming and charismatic. He was an outstanding investigative reporter with an irreverent streak. The year before he died, I'd taken a leave from the Journal to work on a book, and he faxed me an article from an Indian magazine that he thought would help with my research. "From your assistant, Danny," he scrawled across the cover sheet, in his self-deprecating style.

He observed the media machine with a contrarian, skeptical eye. In November 2001, after the war in Afghanistan had begun, he wrote to me: "I'm getting to Pakistan just in time for the lull between 'well, more bombings, more deaths -- who cares now?' and 'shit, it's December, we have to round out our prize packages' " with big articles for awards such as the Pulitzers. "Okay, no more cynicism from here," he signed off. "I'm going to be a father and must maintain an idyllic view of the world."

Danny had me teach him how to say "Do I look like a fool?" in Urdu so he could tell off Mumbai taxi drivers who tried to overcharge him. Once, shortly after arriving in Peshawar on an assignment, he wrote me: "I'm at the Pearl Continental, wasn't able to get a free room despite my argument that I was the owner."

Don't look for that personality in the movie. You won't find it.

I know I'm guilty of assisting in Hollywood's mythmaking. In the fall of 2003, I went with Mariane to the Los Angeles home of Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston, where we ate bagels and drank coffee by the pool while listening to their pitch for buying the movie rights to her book. When Mariane decided to sell, Warner Bros. Pictures sought my "life rights," too. I agreed to sell them, even though a friend told me that making a movie about Danny's death seemed exploitative.

A year passed. Pitt and Aniston got a divorce. Pitt and Jolie got together. The movie rights passed to Paramount Vantage. Paramount hired British director Michael Winterbottom. And a script emerged.

When I read it last summer, I felt as though I'd been punched in the gut. I sat across from British actress Archie Panjabi, who had been dispatched to my home in Morgantown to learn to play me. I lamented that none of the characters were fully developed, least of all Danny.

When I watched the movie last month, I was relieved that I wasn't a servant girl, as I felt an early script had it. So I wrote to a producer, "Thumbs up okay on my end." But I wasn't being true to myself. I was reacting to the power and seduction of Hollywood.

A few days later, when I saw the photos of stars in evening gowns and tuxedos floating down the red carpet for the Cannes premiere of "A Mighty Heart," Danny's not-quite-5-year-old son among them, I had that sinking feeling again. Other friends of Danny's said they did, too. It was so not Danny.

Worst of all, the pomp came at the same time as a chilling reminder of his death. On the night of the Cannes premiere, the Daily Times, a Pakistani newspaper, ran a photo of an emaciated man said to have been the owner of the plot of land where Danny had been held and where his remains had been buried. The accompanying story alleged that the man had been held in the U.S. naval prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, then released to Pakistani intelligence authorities, who had recently dumped him at his family's home. The headline: "Most wanted man in Daniel Pearl case: Saud Memon dies."

On the eve of the movie's New York premiere earlier this month, I was in Phoenix at the Investigative Reporters and Editors conference. I was there to announce the establishment of the Pearl Project, a joint faculty-student investigative reporting project at Georgetown University that will aim to find out who really killed Danny and why. It's my own way of honoring him. His story isn't over for me. I set up the project because -- despite a confession from Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of 9/11 and of Richard Reid's failed shoe-bombing, that he killed Danny -- I believe we still don't know the real truth behind what happened to him.

After the conference, I had to decide whether to go to New York for the premiere or head back home. I went home. In my home office, I stood in front of a copy of the chart I had started in Karachi to make sense of everything that happened after that January day in 2002. At the center is a single name: Danny.

pearlproject@georgetown.edu
Asra Q. Nomani teaches journalism in Georgetown University's School of Continuing Studies.

Here's One Muslim That's Offended By The Reactions of "Offended" Muslims

2007-06-23T22:28:00.000+03:00

(Reprinted from e-mail)
Irshad Manji: Islam the problem
* The irrational response to Salman Rushdie's knighthood is sadly typical
* June 21, 2007

GROWING up in Vancouver, I attended an Islamic school every Saturday. There, I learned that Jews can't be trusted because they worship "moolah, not Allah", meaning money, not God. According to my teacher, every last Jew is consumed with business.

But looking around my neighbourhood, I noticed that most of the new business signs featured Asian languages: Mandarin, Cantonese, Japanese, Korean, Hindi, Punjabi and plenty of Urdu. Not Hebrew, Urdu, which is spoken throughout Pakistan.

That reality check made me ask: What if my religious school isn't educating me? What if it's indoctrinating me?

I'm reminded of this question thanks to the news that Salman Rushdie, author of The Satanic Verses and 10 other works of fiction, will be knighted by the Queen.

On Monday, Pakistan's religious affairs minister said that because Rushdie had blasphemed Islam with provocative literature, it was understandable that angry Muslims would commit suicide bombings over his knighthood.

Members of parliament, as well as the Pakistani Government, amplified the condemnation of Britain, feeding cries of offence to Muslim sensibilities from Europe to Asia.

As a Muslim, you better believe I'm offended - by these absurd reactions. READ THE REST...

I'm offended that it is not the first time honours from the West have met with vitriol and violence. In 1979, Pakistani physicist Abdus Salam became the first Muslim to win the Nobel Prize in science. He began his acceptance speech with a verse from the Koran.

Salam's country ought to have celebrated him. Instead, rioters tried to prevent him from re-entering the country. Parliament even declared him a non-Muslim because he belonged to a religious minority. His name continues to be controversial, invoked by state authorities in hushed tones.

I'm offended that every year, there are more women killed in Pakistan for allegedly violating their family's honour than there are detainees at Guantanamo Bay.

Muslims have rightly denounced the mistreatment of Gitmo prisoners. But where's our outrage over the murder of many more Muslims at the hands of our own?

I'm offended that in April, mullahs at an extreme mosque in Pakistan issued a fatwa against hugging.

The country's female tourism minister had embraced - or, depending on the account you follow, accepted a congratulatory pat from - her skydiving instructor after she successfully jumped in a French fundraiser for the victims of the 2005 Pakistan earthquake. Clerics announced her act of touching another man to be "a great sin" and demanded she be fired.

I'm offended by their fatwa proclaiming that women should stay at home and remain covered at all times.

I'm offended that they've bullied music store owners and video vendors into closing up shop.

I'm offended that the Government tiptoes around their craziness because these clerics threaten suicide attacks if confronted.

I'm offended that on Sunday, at least 35 Muslims in Kabul were blown to bits by other Muslims and on Tuesday, 80 more in Baghdad by Islamic "insurgents", with no official statement from Pakistan to deplore these assaults on fellow believers.

I'm offended that amid the internecine carnage, a professed atheist named Salman Rushdie tops the to-do list.

Above all, I'm offended that so many other Muslims are not offended enough to demonstrate widely against God's self-appointed ambassadors. We complain to the world that Islam is being exploited by fundamentalists, yet when reckoning with the opportunity to resist their clamour en masse, we fall curiously silent.

In a battle between flaming fundamentalists and mute moderates, who do you think is going to win?

I'm not saying that standing up to intimidation is easy. This past spring, the Muslim world made it that much more difficult.

A 56-member council of Islamic countries pushed the UN Human Rights Council to adopt a resolution against the "defamation of religion". Pakistan led the charge. Focused on Islam rather than on faith in general, the resolution allows repressive regimes to squelch freedom of conscience further - and to do so in the guise of international law.

On occasion, though, the people of Pakistan show that they don't have to be muzzled by clerics and politicians.

Last year, civil society groups vocally challenged a set of anti-female laws, three decades old and supposedly based on the Koran. Their religiously respectful approach prompted even mullahs to hint that these laws are man-made, not God-given. This month, too, Pakistanis forced their Government to lift restrictions on the press. No wonder my own book, translated into Urdu and posted on my website, is being downloaded in droves. Religious authorities won't let it be sold in the markets. But they can't stop Pakistanis - or other Muslims - from satiating a genuine hunger for ideas.

In that spirit, it's high time to ban hypocrisy under the banner of Islam. Rushdie is not the problem. Muslims are.

After all, the very first bounty on Rushdie's head was worth $US2 million. It rose to $US 2.5 million.

Then came higher reward numbers. The chief benefactor, Iran's government, claimed that the money had been profitably invested. Looks like Jews are not the only people handy at business.

Irshad Manji is creator of the new documentary Faith Without Fear. She is author of The Trouble with Islam Today: A Muslim's Call for Reform in Her Faith (Random House Australia

Technorati Tags: Islam, Muslim, Salman, Rushdie, Knighthood, Pakistan, Koran

Angelina Jolie Isn't Just A Pretty Face With A Pretty Pitt; She's Also A Terrorist Excuser

2007-06-20T23:06:00.000+03:00

When it comes to actors to singers, I really just wish they would just leave their politics at home and just act and freakin' sing. Jolie has just come out with a movie supposedly depicting the events surrounding the death of reporter, Daniel Pearl, who was, oh yeah, Jewish, kidnapped, beheaded, and mutilated by Al-Queada early in 2002. Apparently, Jolie took the concept of "creative license" to the extreme in this movie. I know she's all about adopting the African babies and saving Cambodia, but her knowledge of any terrorist related matters couldn't fit in one of her perfect lips. But, hey, that doesn't stop her from turning the Daniel Pearl story from one of barbarism, Antisemitism, and terrorism into a of progressive, moral relativist, excuse and ignore the terrorists, blame America hate-fest.

An Unmighty Film
By Debbie Schlussel
FrontPageMagazine.com | June 18, 2007

I went to the screening of "A Mighty Heart"--activists Brad Pitt's and Angelina Jolie's movie on the Al-Qaeda murder of Daniel Pearl--expecting a movie with an agenda.

And that is exactly what I got. That, plus a Lifetime Channel weepy-damsel-in-distress movie of the week. Muslims are the heroes--NOT the perpetrators--in this "Can't we all just get along?" kumbaya film ostensibly about terrorism.

As one would expect from the Jolie-Pitts, "A Mighty Heart" is mostly NOT about the Al-Qaeda murder of Daniel Pearl, killed in cold blood specifically because he was a Jew. In fact, the movie minimizes that, instead repeatedly blaming America for its treatment of Guantanamo Bay prisoners as the reason Pearl was cut into the ten pieces like a slaughtered chicken, the state in which his body was found. (That's no surprise, given that the Jolie-Pitts hired as "A Mighty Heart's" director, Michael Winterbottom, who also directed the propaganda fake-umentary, " The Road to Guantanamo.") In "A Mighty Heart," we see no depiction at all of Pearl's captivity or even kidnapping by Qaeda thugs, but for a few re-enactments of tiny parts of the famous Pearl video.

Most shocking, we get an onscreen repeat of the oft-told Muslim myth that 4,000 Jews didn't show up for work at the World Trade Center on 9/11, because the Jews planned the attacks. The movie provides no refutation of this myth or any indication that it is invalid. (It shouldn't be shocking, though, given Jolie's anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian activities.)

And instead of depictions of Daniel Pearl's treatment at the hand of Muslims, Jolie/Pitt repeatedly hit you over the head with a baseball bat that the hero--not the murderers--in the Daniel Pearl story is a Muslim, a Pakistani Police Captain. We see him admonishing a Qaeda Pearl suspect that he is not "a good Muslim." The movie also stresses that Pearl's friend, Asra Nomani, is a feminist Muslim who also is upset and worried for Daniel Pearl. And don't forget the cheerful, hijab-encrusted full-time, diligent housekeeper and her cute little Muslim baby boy--both of whom we constantly see, in-your-face-style, throughout the movie.

That's all nice and dandy. But these Muslims wouldn't be involved, but for the fact that oodles of their fellow co-religionists--the ones who follow the dominant Sunni strain of their religion, Wahhabism--kidnapped and murdered Pearl in the name of their religion, an undisputable fact that is minimized as much as possible in "A Mighty Heart." READ THE REST...

The long, boring, disjointed movie is less about an Al-Qaeda kidnapping and live crude dissection murder of an American Jew, and more a mixture of MTV's "The Real World" (or CBS' even worse reality show "Big Brother") and a Lifetime Network movie of the week. Short on Qaeda info, it is long on scenes of Angelina Jolie, as Mariane Pearl, wandering, brooding, and whining as she roams a cool looking, modern house in what is supposed to be Pakistan.

Mostly, we see her speaking--and whining--in a really, really bad "Saturday Night Live" version of a French accent (that's in addition to the brief, terrible Israeli accent of the actor playing Judea Pearl, Daniel's father). Peppy Le Pew and Peter Sellers were far more convincing.

We see Jolie, uh . . . Pearl, roaming around a cool modern house interacting with friends and associates and constantly uttering meaningful, poignant lines, like: "Sh*t, Sh*t, Sh*t;" "Bullsh*t, Bullsh*t, Bullsh*t;" "F*ck, F*ck, F*ck." Actually, most of the American characters in this film have those obscenity-laced lines, too.

On top of that, we're treated to dialogue by Mariane's Muslim friends, like this:

What do Americans really know about Afghanistan and Pakistan . . . other than bombing them?

In addition to blaming America's Gitmo detention of terrorists for Pearl's murder, the movie also blames the Wall Street Journal for providing the CIA computer files it obtained, giving insight into the operation of shoe bomber Richard Reid, his Al-Qaeda connection, and his scoping out of Israel. By doing that, in Jolie/Pitt/Mariane Pearl's eyes, the Journal confirmed Qaeda's assertion that Pearl is a CIA agent.

Any reason, any excuse to grab for Pearl's inexcusable, horrific murder--other than Muslims hate a Jew and barbaricly kill him for it--and the movie grabs onto it. Even prior to making the movie, last year, Brad Pitt a/k/a Mr. Jolie--producer of this film--lectured us that

We hope the film can increase understanding between people of all faiths and portray the story and the people involved . . . without anger or judgment.

In other words, don't judge the Muslims. Don't judge the people who barbaricly killed Pearl because he was a Jew. Don't even think that's why they killed him. Understand the murderers. Understand that it's not right for us to keep murderous terrorists in detention with three gourmet halal meals a day and every religious article they'd ever want. Understand that the Wall Street Journal should never help the CIA with intelligence to counter terrorists.

And those are the messages of this movie. That's why, instead of scenes of Muslims beating, interrogating, torturing, beheading, and dissecting Daniel Pearl, we see Muslim Asra Nomani crying and anguishing over Danny. We see Muslim police officers very concerned about Pearl. Mariane tells us of the beauty of Muslim Eid Al-Adha sacrifices of lambs. We see a scene of Mariane, a French Afro-Cuban/Dutch Buddhist, bowing down to the ground meditating. Then, it shows Muslims also bowing down to the ground praying to Allah. Forget the butchering Muslim murderers. We are all the same. We all care. We all pray in a similar manner. That's the message of this movie.

And then there are the even sillier parts of this movie. Woven in with the earnest, concerned Muslim detectives and police officers, we see caricatures of the Americans, which are such comedic parodies, you wonder how they made it into what is supposed to be a serious movie about an execution of an American Jew. They appear stolen from the editorial cartoons of Islamist newspapers in Egypt and Saudi Arabia and propaganda dramas on Hezbollah's Al-Manar.

We see a useless lesbian FBI agent who does nothing but sound and appear officious in a Rosie O'Donnell know-it-all way. No, the movie doesn't say she's a lesbian, but trust me, they picked the most butch-looking actress possible. Clearly, she plays for the other team.

Then, there's Randall Bennett, a mysterious "security official" from the U.S. Embassy in Karachi. Played by Will Patton, who often plays criminals, bad guys, and bizarros, the CIA-esque Bennett constantly wears sunglasses indoors and gushes and drools over Pakistani torture of suspects.

And don't forget Wall Street Journal reporter Steve Levine, played by Gary Wilmes, the most stereotypically Jewish-looking actor they could cast--a living embodiment of the angst-ridden, sweaty big-nosed, glasses-wearing Jew you'd find in "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" picture book for kids.

Yup, that's how the Muslim world--and Pitt and Jolie--see America: bizarre, drooling torturers in sunglasses, lesbian FBI agents, and big-nosed, bespectacled Jews who dominate the media.

So much for Pitt's exhorting us to be "understanding" and "without judgment."

At the end of the movie, we are told in Jolie/Mariane's voice that

Ten Pakistanis were killed this month by terrorists. They [Pakistanis and Muslims] are suffering as much as we are.

Are they really? How many of the Americans were killed because they were from rival terrorist groups? How many Pakistanis were blown to smithereens because they were on airplanes or in the two tall towers they flew into?

The problem with the film is that the Jolie-Pitts do have judgment--against us and not the terrorists or their Islam--and that they have very selective understanding--lenience only for those, ie., Muslims, who hate Jews and hate Americans, looking for that tiny fringe of moderation that's barely on the far, outer margin.

In the many print and broadcast interviews in the mounting PR campaign for this summer movie, Jolie tells the press that

Mariane is a person who has every right to be full of hate, and yet she's completely the opposite. She wants to have a dialogue.

And there are Jolie's and Pitt's lectures that

The hero of this movie is a Muslim Pakistani Captain . . . . Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Jewish--they all came together, all of them becoming great friends.

The problem is not with whether or not Mariane Pearl hates those who butchered her husband to death or whether those who helped investigate it were a tiny number of Muslim friends and police who don't represent the dominant anti-Semitic, pan-terrorist thought on the Muslim street.

The problem is that those who butchered her husband were dominated by hate and that they are Muslim. And a propaganda film whitewashing that by a beautiful actress and her metrosexual boyfriend won't make them hate us any less or make Islam any less extremist.

Until we face those facts, there will be many more Daniel Pearls. Onscreen Valentines to terrorists and their hateful religion, a la "A Mighty Heart," only enable their murderers.

If your heart is so big that your head is buried in the sand, it's not "A Mighty Heart." It's a weak heart, soon to be in cardiac arrest.

Technorati Tags: Daniel, Pearl, Pakistan, Muslim, Terrorist, Jew, Angelina, Jolie, Brad, Pitt, Movie, A+Mighty+Heart, Arab, America, Guantanemo, Bay

Leftist and Christian Activists Ignore Dire Plight of Palestinian Christians

2007-06-20T16:03:00.000+03:00

Sorry I haven't been posting in a few days. I am recovering from a bad bout of flu and have not been able to sit much in front of the computer. I'm still not 100% yet, but I can look at a computer screen now without throwing up, so we're on our way. Anyways, T.M.I., sorry, let's get down to business. There is something very important to talk about that's largely being ignored by all the leftist and Christian activists that are engaging in boycotts of Israel. They are ignoring the dire plight of the Palestinian Christians at the hands of the Palestinian Muslims. Let's look at the basics of the leftist logic here before we get into specifics. The leftists and peaceniks believe in the Palestinian right of return. They believe that the Palestinians should have a full right to live in Israel. They believe Israel is racist because it's a declared Jewish state regardless of the fact that at least 20% of Israel's citizens are NOT Jewish. However, on the other side, they believe it's fully OK for a future Palestinian state to be completely Judenrein, or free of Jews. They make no demands that a future Palestinian state should be open and safe to all religions. Actually, they don't say a word about any declared Muslim/Arab state's lack of tolerance or freedom towards other religions or even other sects of the controlling religion. No, it's only toward Israel. In fact, instead of protesting or giving any sort of outcry against the misogyny of Islamic state (which you would think would happen given that these leftists are supposed liberals and feminists), they romanticize it and chastise those that protest these policies by calling for tolerance and acceptance of other peoples' cultures.

Furthermore, while protests galore are held in the Western streets about Israel's perceived lack of religious tolerance, e.g. protests held when Israel started digging for a new secure walkway outside of the Western wall which were nowhere in the vicinity of the Muslim Al-Aqsa Temple but were protested by the West as violating the rights of the Muslim religious sites in Jerusalem, not one protest or peep is heard about the plight of the Palestinian Christians. No, that's not right. The only time a peep is heard about the Palestinian Christians when, around Christmas time, the MSM writes articles about how Israel's Security Fence is responsible for the lack of big crowds in Bethlehem. This is patently false, but I digress. The Christians in all Palestinian areas are being mistreated, abused, and even persecuted by the controlling Palestinian Muslims, NOT as a result of any Israeli policy. However, as Hamas is solidifying their control of Gaza and beginning to establish a radical proxy Iranian Islamic state, the Christians of Gaza are in severe peril. Their lives and religious way of life are in clear and present danger. Front Page Mag discusses the ignorance, enabling, and justifications of the Palestinian Muslims' behavior that have led to the present situation of a Palestinian Christian population that stands in real danger of being completely eradicated. Yes, religious tolerance... READ THE REST...

Christian Monastery Attacked in Gaza
By Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook
Palestinian Media Watch | June 20, 2007

During the recent fighting in Gaza between Hamas and Fatah, the Christian community in Gaza was also targeted. The Palestinian paper Al-Ayyam reported that “Armed masked men… stole, destroyed and burned down a monastery and a church school in Gaza, after they bombed the main gate with RPG shells… they destroyed the main gate of the monastery with an RPG shell, and then entered the church and destroyed everything in the monastery: The crosses, the holy books, computers and photocopy machines." They appeared to be members of Hamas’ Al-Qassam Brigades, however, the Hamas has directed the blame at the Palestinian Authority police.

It should be noted that while this may have been a Hamas attack on the church, the Christian community has been suffering under Fatah rule as well. Ever since the West Bank cities were given over from Israel to the Palestinian Authority the Christian population has been living under very difficult conditions.

Palestinian writer Khaled Abu Toameh recently reported in The Jerusalem Post on the ruin of the Christian community of Bethlehem:

"The conditions of Christians in Bethlehem and its surroundings had deteriorated ever since the area was handed over [from Israel] to the PA in 1995…. 'Every day we hear of another Christian family that has immigrated to the US, Canada or Latin America… The Christians today make up less than 15 percent of the population'… "Samir Qumsiyeh [said]: "I believe that 15 years from now there will be no Christians left in Bethlehem."

When the West Bank was under Israeli administration the Christian population of Bethlehem was over 60%.

This attack on the Gaza church, though more aggressive than the actions in Bethlehem, seem to be part of a Palestinian pattern of marginalizing the Christian community.
[...] READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE

Gaza Christians warned to submit to Islam
Tuesday, June 19, 2007 by Staff Writer

Gaza-based Muslim groups affiliated with Hamas and possibly Al Qaeda have warned local Christians that Hamas' military conquest of the volatile coastal strip means they must now fully submit to Islamic ritual law.

In an interview with WorldNetDaily, Sheikh Abu Saqer, leader of the group Jihadia Salafiya, said that Gaza's Muslims “expect our Christian neighbors to understand the new Hamas rule means real changes. They must be ready for Islamic rule if they want to live in peace in Gaza.”

“Missionary activity” will no longer be tolerated, and those suspected of trying to covert local Muslims to Christianity will be “harshly punished,” said Abu Saqer. Additionally, the consumption of alcohol is now prohibited in Gaza, and all women must fully cover themselves in public.

In order to ensure compliance with these regulations, Abu Saqer announced the formation of a new “military wing” that will a close eye on the subjects of “Hamastan.”

Following last week's unprovoked assault on a Catholic church and school in Gaza City, most are unconvinced that even full submission to Gaza's new conservative Muslim overlords will afford any degree of peace and security to the area's tiny Christian population.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Gaza, Palestinian, Christian, Muslim, Persecution, Hamas, Fatah, Hamastan, Church

Melanie Phillips Also Has Something To Say About The Two State Sollution

2007-06-15T11:09:00.000+03:00

While I don't agree that a Hamas controlled Gaza is Israel's worst nightmare, this is an excellent article and worth reading all the way through.

The two-state solution
Melanie Phillips’s Diary

As the Israel boycott sputters on in Britain, with 250 academics denouncing the UCU’s action in an ad in today’s Times and with the House of Lords expressing its concern about the rise in Jew-hatred on campus of which the boycott call is but the latest example, the Palestinians aren’t giving the UCU’s stand against Israel’s ‘occupation’ quite the endorsement it might have expected. Ha’aretz reports:

On Tuesday, a Palestinian journalist likened the Palestinian Authority to a smoke-belching car wreck, adding that it was time to toss the keys to the Israelis. His view is shared by many Palestinian civilians in Gaza, who in recent days have told the media that they are fed up. ‘We’ve had enough, we should be so lucky as to see the return of the Israeli occupation.’

Yes, there are Palestinians in Gaza who actually want the Israelis back in occupation. This is why.

At least 15 Palestinians, including a United Nations relief worker, were killed today as Hamas looked set to complete its conquest of the entire Gaza Strip.

Health officials said another 14 protesters were wounded by bullets and brought to the hospital in civilian cars because ambulances couldn’t navigate the heavy fire….

Muhammad Swairki, 28, a cook for Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’s presidential guard, was thrown to his death, with his hands and legs tied, from a 15-story apartment building in Gaza City on Sunday…

Muhammad al-Ra’fati, a Hamas supporter and mosque preacher, was thrown from a Gaza City high-rise apartment building…

Fatah gunmen began firing mortars and rocket-propelled grenades at Shifa Hospital in Gaza City…

At a hospital in Beit Hanun, three family members with ties to Fatah were killed, and others wounded. Hospital officials reported that the three were being treated for injuries sustained earlier. One was reportedly shot at close range…

Hamas gunmen attacked the home of a Fatah security official with mortars and grenades, killing his 14-year-old son and three women inside, security officials said. Other Fatah gunmen stormed the house of a Hamas lawmaker and burned it down…

Jamal Abu Jadian, a top Fatah commander, fled his home in the northern Gaza Strip Tuesday evening dressed as a woman to avoid dozens of Hamas militiamen who had attacked it. When he arrived at a hospital a few hundred meters away from his house, he was discovered by a group of Hamas gunmen, who took turns shooting him in the head with automatic rifles. ‘They literally blew his head off with more than 40 bullets,’ said a doctor at Kamal Udwan Hospital.

‘The situation in the Gaza Strip, and especially in the city of Gaza, is scary. Murders are committed by the dozen, using every [conceivable] weapon… The murder machine, fueled by every conceivable type of hatred, is hurtling in every direction, all the time, everywhere… in the mosques… in the schools… [There are] executions… Leaders are attacked, and their families humiliated… Children and innocent civilians are being murdered…’ Talal Okal, columnist for the Palestinian Authority daily Al-Ayyam, May 17, 2007. READ THE REST...

Even Human Rights Watch has now been forced to condemn the Palestinians:
The Human Rights Watch organization Wednesday condemned Hamas and Fatah for committing ‘serious violations of international humanitarian law, in some cases amounting to war crimes’ in violence in Gaza in recent days. It also took the Islamic Jihad and the Fatah Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades to task for a June 9 incident in which gunmen used a jeep bearing ‘TV’ insignias to allow them to approach and attack an IDF post in southern Israel, calling it a ‘serious violation of the laws of war.’ In internal Palestinian fighting over the last three days, both Fatah and Hamas military forces have summarily executed captives, killed people not involved in hostilities, and engaged in gun battles with one another inside and near Palestinian hospitals,’ the organization said in a statement.

War crimes, eh? Throwing civilians off the top of buildings? Attacking the wounded in hospitals? Using press insignia as camouflage for attacks, thus putting all journalists at risk? Dozens and dozens of civilians murdered, including children?

So where’s the call for a boycott of the Palestinians?

To those for whom Israel is the cosmic villain of our times — even though it has never behaved in such a barbaric fashion — the implications of these terrible events in Gaza are simply unprocessable. Their extreme discomfiture is evident in their silence. If Israel kills Palestinians in its attempt to defend its civilians from being blown up in pizza parlours or pulverised by rocket attack, the media descends into an instant frenzy of (unjust and distorted) condemnation. But presented with this orgy of Palestinian violence in Gaza, there is little more than an embarrassed shuffling of feet. The Independent ventures bravely into these treacherous waters by blaming everyone other than the Palestinians for reducing them to economic desperation — this despite the fact that since sanctions were imposed on Hamas, the amount of funding going intro Gaza has actually doubled, if not trebled. What it is to be a newspaper of moral principle, eh?

The fact is that what is happening in Gaza is the savage retort to all those who believe that a Palestinian state is the answer. When handed the reins of self-government, this is how the Palestinians behave. Hundreds of rockets fired upon Israel, and their own people thrown off the top of tall buildings and murdered in hospital. As of today, a Palestinian state is simply impossible. Gaza and the West Bank have become two different political entities. As the Jerusalem Post reports:

‘The two-state solution has finally worked,’ a Palestinian journalist in the Gaza Strip commented sarcastically. ‘Today, all our enemies have good reason to celebrate.’

In fact, Israel is certainly not celebrating. Anarchy on its doorstep in Gaza is a nightmare, not least because such chaos spells al Qaeda; indeed, there are good reasons for thinking that al Qaeda are in Gaza already, as this article for the Jerusalem Centre for Public Affairs makes clear. Such chaos presents Israel with yet another fearsome dilemma. With Hezbollah rearming in Lebanon, Syria making preparations for war and Iran racing to develop nuclear weapons, the last thing Israel needs is to reoccupy Gaza. But it may feel it has no alternative, given the already strong public pressure to Do Something to stop the rocket attacks from Gaza onto Sderot, and their likely escalation to Ashkelon and maybe other Israeli cities. Yet occupation is a trap that Israel must do everything in its power to avoid, not least because it would unite Gaza behind Hamas and against Israel — doubtless the very reason for the rocket attacks in the first place.

Moreover, having Hamastan and al Qaeda on their doorstep presents such a threat to Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia that this could be a moment for a remarkable strategic rebalancing throughout the Middle East. Israel’s fight is suddenly not merely the west’s own fight but that of swathes of the Arab world itself. In the past, Israel has done the dirty work of an international community which has been happy to stand back as it does so — including certain Arab states which have quietly rejoiced as it has gone in against the Palestinians, only to take advantage of the breathing space it thus provided for them by promptly resuming their century-old war of attrition against Jewish peoplehood. Israel should no longer furnish the political kindling for its own sacrifice in this way. The Arab states themselves must finally be forced to deal with the monster they have created.

As ever, Israel is today between yet another murderous rock and a genocidal hard place. And as ever, the international community which has put it there by refusing to acknowledge the real nature of this terrible conflict — and that includes Israel’s so-called friends in America and Britain — continues to make Israel’s position more, not less difficult. From Europe to Washington, siren voices call for ‘engagement’ with Hamas on the grounds that this will bring the wild men in from the cold.

Since Hamas is committed to the genocide of the Jews, it is puzzling to know precisely what there is to engage about. Look, whisper these European and American useful idiots, there are people in Hamas talking about a ten-year ceasefire! They’re even talking about removing their endorsement of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion from their Charter!! Such ignorance and naivety make one want to weep. The most likely outcome of such noises-off is that Hamas will very reasonably conclude that the more rockets they fire at Israel and the more Palestinians they throw off the top of tall buildings, the more the Europeans — whose response to brute power is invariably to prostrate themselves before it —will seize any excuse to convince themselves that, yes, these are people with whom we can do business.

Even more astoundingly, America and Israel have inadvertently — but all too predictably — helped arm the very people they are now fighting. With Israel acting as the middle-man, America has been sending weapons to Fatah to equip it in its war with Hamas. Leaving aside the small matter that Fatah, too, remains committed to the destruction of Israel and that its own terrorist affiliates have persistently attacked Israeli targets, we can now see from the Jerusalem Post the truly imbecilic consequence:

A PA official expressed deep concern over Hamas’s success in taking control of several Palestinian security installations. He revealed that Hamas had succeeded in laying its hands on large amounts of weapons belonging to the Fatah-controlled security forces in many parts of the Gaza Strip. ‘They have seized thousands of rifles, large amounts of ammunition and dozens of vehicles, including armored jeeps,’ he said. ‘This is really bad news for all.’

And meanwhile the elephant in the room remains Iran, which is funding and arming Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Syria, not to mention waging war against the west by proxy in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Israel remains caught in a lethal trap, because it is trying to solve a problem that it cannot solve since it did not create it. The real architects of this impasse are the countries of the free world, which have failed utterly to grasp that the Israel/Palestine conflict is but one theatre of a global struggle; not a conflict over the division of a piece of land but rather one front in a global onslaught against the west. While trying vainly to solve Israel /Palestine in hope this will calm everything else down, the free world fails to grasp that it is only by dealing with regional and global aggression that Israel/Palestine will ever be resolved. Backing the Big Lie of the justice of Palestinian statehood, which has meant in fact that a country that was victorious at its rebirth against forces that tried to wipe it out has uniquely been expected ever since to make reparations to its attackers who continue to try to destroy it and to provide them with a state from which they can finish the job, has been the biggest single incentive to terror and war in the Middle East. Only when this is acknowledged, and the free world locates the moral compass which has been absent from its dealings for decades, will there be any prospect of justice in the Middle East and peace for the world.

I Support The Two State Sollution

2007-06-15T08:33:00.000+03:00

I support the two state sollution.... between Hamas and Fatah, which will result in Hamastan in Gaza and Fatah Land in the West Bank. What can I say about what's going in Gaza right now? Umm.... I told you so. No, that just doesn't seem right. Look, we all knew this was going to happen. It's been happening for the better part of a couple of years now. This is culmination of years of hard work by both Hamas and Fatah. Hey, spending millions earmarked for food and medicine on weapons is hard work. You have to really sweat to convince the world that the next million will go to the people. OK, they really didn't have to do much to convince the world to give them more blood money. I mean, Norway must be feeling pretty good about themselves about how their $10 million donation has helped Hamas' cause. I'm sure Norway is pretty smug about what they've done.

Here's the question of the hour for me. Do I feel sorry for the Palestinian Gazans? How can I not feel sorry for them. The ones that want no part of this blood feud are getting on TV, at their own peril, and practically BEGGING for Israel to come back in and restore the order through "occupation". Of course, if Israel were to go in, they'd be screaming bloody murder about the occupation, but that's besides the point. Their very utterances could get them killed for collaboration, so, yes, I feel a bit sorry for them. On the other hand, I believe and Judaism teaches us the concept of personal responsibility. You have to be held accountable for your actions and choices. The Palestinians made their choice when they went to the ballot boxes in 2006 and voted Hamas into power. You can't tell me with a straight face that the Palestinian people didn't honestly know what was going to happen, what the consequences of their actions would be, when they voted Hamas into power.

I tell this to the world. Those of you in Europe and on the Left who screamed that the world MUST recognize the Hamas government, regardless of its terrorist status, becuase they were democratically elected and now scream that the world must go in and stop what Hamas is doing can NOT have it both ways. The Palestinians people are now reaping what they sew. I hate to say this because it sound so mean, but it's nothing less than the truth. The Palestinians made their bed, now let them sleep in its blood soaked sheets.

I must also add to this. The West has contributed to this event. They enabled the Palestinians' dependency by making no solid demands on the Palestinians to change their ways. They threw money at the Palestinians and created the very evil of what a welfare state creates instead of supporting and forcing the Palestinians to create a self sufficient economy and society. Whenever the Palestinians committed terrorist attacks against Israel, or the Palestinian government broke its part of peace deals, or never did its part in the first place, the West NEVER once held the Palestinians accountable. They have always justified and excused the poor stupid Palestinians as basically children who don't know any better while, at the same time, demanding more and more of Israel and holding Israel accountable for the actions of the Palestinians. They also threw millions and millions of dollars at the Palestinians knowing full thqat the money was going to buy weapons and munitions instead of to food, medicine, and education. They threw it at them because the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the West's foreign policy jewel. It is the West's guilt-be-gone from the fact that much worse atrocities and conflicts are going on in the world. Thousands and thousands of people are getting raped, murdered, and mamed in Darfur every day, but the UN hasn't stood up yet to call for an international force to go in and save these people. No, the West couldn't give one good damn about what happens to the Palestinians. They just like to continuously trump up the problem, so they can feel like they're doing a bit of good in the world.

Unfortunately for the Palestinians, the West can no longer justify or legitimize their support for the Palestinians government. They can no longer make excuses for the atrocities that the Palestinian terrorists are committing. When it was against the Israelis, the West could scream and justify it because of the "occupation", but when the Palestinians are killing eachother, there's really nothing you can say, and there's really no realistic way to blame it on Israel. The West has also run out of patience with the Palestinians. Then, there's the last and most important point of all: WHEN IT COMES TO ARAB ON ARAB VIOLENCE, THE WORLD JUST DOESN'T CARE.

I for one am glad that this is happening. Now, all the charades stop. If Hamas declares an Islamic state in Gaza, Israel must do its part by treating Gaza like a state. I know I said this when the Disengagement occurred, but there really are no excuses now. There is no Fatah left in Gaza. They are being summarily executed in the streets, and Abbas has fled to the West Bank. Israel can no longer say that they will stop Gazan violence against Israel by talking to the Fatah "moderates". No, if Hamas declares a state and continues its rocket attacks on Israel, she will have every right to carpet bomb the Strip to hell. Like taking personal responsibilities for your actions, you can't have it both ways here. You want to be a state, fine, I'll treat you like a state. You can't declare yourself a state, commit crimes against another state, and then run to the defense of the West when that other country makes you pay dearly for your actions.

As the immortal saying goes, "The time for talking is through."

One Year Since You Been Gone

2007-06-14T08:23:00.000+03:00

Hi Gilad,
I don't know you, and you don't know me, but I feel compeled to write a letter to you. It's been a year since you were stolen away; stolen away from your family, stolen away from you friends, stolen away from your country. It's been a year since you were kidnapped by a bunch of barbaric savages who would rather kill than create. We don't know if you're still alive. If you're alive, we don't know what they're doing to you or how you're being treated. My god, you must feel so alone. I imagine you probably feel abandoned by the very government that you swore to protect the day your first put on your uniform. Of course, you're not alone. Your family is with you. Your friends are with you. Your country is with you even if you might feel that your leaders have abandoned you.

I can't help but feel angry at the situation. I'm sure if you were asked your opinion, you would say that you would rather rot than have your government release hundreds or thousands of blood thirsty "prisoners" to get you out of your situation. You would know that all of your comrades would be in danger to be kidnapped if these barbarians knew that their crimes paid dividends. You would know that your whole country would be in danger from violent people being freed to commit their crimes once more.

Yet, there you sit, in the middle of a civil war, hearing the gun fights and bloodshed unfold all around you, and you have been essentially left behind. Sitting in power is a weasely snake of a man that tries to crawl his way out of trouble and be invisible just so he can hold on to a brown leather chair with his name on it. He won't send any troops in after you because he's afraid another commission will convene to try and kick him out of his chair. So, instead, he does nothing. He hems and haws with your life, throwing a bone here and there about a prisoner exchange but never says the words, "We will go in and do everything in our power to find you and get you back. We will not negotiate with terrorists. WE WILL NOT LEAVE YOU BEHIND!" No, because that would take action and resolve and courage. This administration has none of those things.

Unfortunately, you have to bear the brunt and worse extreme of that cowardice and spinelessness. I have wept for you. I have spent nights wondering what you're doing or thinking right now. I have spent time even kicking and screaming at my helplessness. I have never lost hope, though. I am a big believer that we put out the energy of our feelings. I would never want my negativity to touch you. But, I feel helpless. I can do nothing to help you. All I can do is continue to spread the message to the world that you are still missing. You have been gone for a year, and we cannot MUST NOT forget you.

I continue to pray that you are still alive, that you are not being harmed in any way, that you are holding on to the hope that your people have not forgotten you. We have not forgotten you. May you be be returned home. May the people responsible for this atrocity be condemned to the Divine punishment that is deemed appropriate by the Almighty.

Sincerely,
A member of Klal Yisroel

OK, You're Right.... Finally, Here Is the Proof That Israel Is The Neighborhood Bully

2007-06-12T14:02:00.000+03:00

Technorati Tags: Israel, Aid, Rescue, Medicine, Middle+East

Why I'm Not Writing About The Six Day War

2007-06-09T20:43:00.000+03:00

All around the world, including the blogosphere, everyone's gone crazy this past week writing about the 40th anniversary of the Six Day War. Revisionist historians are coming out of the woodwork like crazy banchies being smoked out by fire. Everywhere, the same thing is being said. The Six Day War was not the glorious victory that everyone claimed it to be. In fact, it was a black mark on history and on Israel. In short, it was very very bad that Israel won the war. Everything bad that has happened since then stems from Israel's victory. Bad. Very very bad. So, why aren't I commenting on it. Well, first of all, there's really nothing to say. Those who say that Israel's victory was bad, Jews and Israeli revisionist historians among them, are simply wrong.

These revisionist historians continue to attempt to hammer home the factually incorrect point that Israel could have simply used to diplomacy and negotiated herself out of war. They say that Israel didn't have to go to war, and the fact that she did proves that she was the aggressor and a colonialist apartheid country in waiting. Of course, history proved this theory wrong in 1973. When Israel decided that it would not repeat its actions of 1967 and not preempt battle, thereby trying to negotiate its way out of war like this historians demand, she almost lost the war and was perilously close to losing her very existence. Of course, these revisionist historians and pseudo-pundits don't like to take the next step and discuss what would have been the consequences had Israel lost the war, either in 1967 or 1973. Best not to go to the place where you would have to admit that the Jews would have all been killed or thrown out of the country in destitution. If you do that, then you have to admit that the Arabs/Muslims are not very peaceful people like you try to claim every single day in your op-ed columns.

So, here's the rub, and this is why I have no interest in rehashing the events of 40 years ago. The ONLY reason that any "historian" or pundit or journalist or politician, this includes Jews and Israelis, makes claims that it was bad that Israel won the Six day War is because they hate the fact that Israel exists. Period. They hate the fact that Israel won the Six Day War so decisively, because in the black holes of their hearts they really believe that the world would be a better place if Israel wasn't in it.

This leads to my theory of why the Six Day War is really such a turning point in the history of the Jews. It's is the event that led the world to be comfortable being Antisemitic again. Bare with me here. Between 1945-1967, the world, especially the West viewed the Jews as mere victims. Having just liberated the Jews from the Concentration and Death camps and witnessing the horrors of 6 million dead Jews by bullet, gas, and oven, the world felt uncomfortable in its Antisemitism. It gave the Jews a country out of guilt. It was a piddling of a country, but it was a good "guilt-be-gone" remedy for the world. Between 1945 and 1967, the world was politically correct in its treatment of the Jews. They were careful to arouse any reminder that they abandoned them in their hour of need. The Jews were weak and needed the protection of the West.

But, the Six Day War changed all that irrevocably. If we can say that any bad came out of the war, it was the transformation of the image of the Jew from one of weakness to one of strength. By virtue of this tremendous victory, it was suddenly OK again for the world to be open and honest about its feelings towards the Jews. With the Palestinians as the perfect excuse, it was again legitimate to call the Jews the reason for all that was bad and evil in the world. It even became fashionable to blame all the world and West's problem on Israel. Islamic terrorism attacking America on 9/11? Well, obviously, it because of America's support of Israel. It became perfectly fine and acceptable to say that if Israel didn't exist, translation: If the JEWS didn't exist, there would be no terrorism or violence or wars. The war in Iraq? Fought for Israel. Therefore, if there were no Israel, there would be no war. If Israel had lost the 1967 war, there would be no Israel, and the rest of the Jews of the world would still be living under the protective PC umbrella of a world still reeling from the aftermath of the Holocaust. Israel wins the '67 War, there is no longer any need to feel any guilt. The Jews are just as bad as the Nazis. They are in the business of apartheid and genocide. The West and the World can maybe in the back of their minds actually feel fine with the Holocaust because the Jews are no different than the Nazis. In fact, had the Holocaust not happened and there had been more Jews settling in Palestine, the JEWS would have committed the Holocaust instead of the Germans.

Of course, this is a sick theory, but look at the history of the West's treatment of Israel since 1967, and how can you make any other conclusion? The only reason that there is any revisionist history about the event is because the West is looking through the lenses of its newly approved Antisemitism in which Israel is the obvious aggressor, and it desired to rule over the helpless and hapless Palestinians.

So, no, there is no reason for me to rehash the events of 40 years ago. I am living in Jerusalem in the state of Israel. That should be enough for you.

Technorati Tags: Israel, 1967, Six+Day+War, America, Britain, Germany, Nazi, Jerusalem, Jew, Palestinian, Antisemitism, Arab, Muslim

Israeli Doctor Shows Truth To British Lies

2007-06-05T12:51:00.000+03:00

Technorati Tags: Israel, Doctor, Hospital, Palestinian, Britian, Boycott, Physician

Bibi Tells It Like It Is

2007-06-02T20:51:00.000+03:00

Technorati Tags: Israel, Britain, Boycott, University, Dresden, Lebanon, Gaza, Rocket

Round Up: More Interesting Takes On Hypocritical British Boycotts

2007-06-01T11:05:00.000+03:00

They all have something interesting and poignant to say, and I strongly suggest going through them all. The only good thing about this and the blatant increase in Antisemitism and Antisemitic "incidents" occurring since about 2000 in Europe and Great Britain is putting things out in the open. Now, we really know how they feel. Fine, bring it out in the open. If the Brits want to go through with this boycott, they better put their money where their mouth is. LITERALLY. I want to be able to hear the noise all the way from Israel of computers being thrown out the window throughout British universities and professors' homes. I can gurantee that every single computer they use has an intel chip that was designed in Israel. I better hear the pitter-patter of medication falling to the floor, because I can guarantee that they use generic drugs created by Israeli pharmeceutical companies like Teva. I better hear the crashing of MRI, CAT, and PET scan machines, because they either have components that were created in Israel or were wholly invented here. I better not hear that any British academic came to the world renowned Biotech conference being held in Israel over the summer. Oh yeah, revolutions in Biotech has become Israel's new pet project. When the Brits come to visit the poor Palestinians, I better not hear that they checked into any Israeli hotels because they were frightened for their lives or wholly unsatisfied with the conditions in the hotels in Gaza or the West Bank. If these boycotts are simply in name only, then they will be revealed for the Antisemitic "intellectual elites" they really are. They are nothing but wolves in peace clothing, hoping to eliminate the Jews by other means.

OK, enough of my ranting, here are the articles from people who can write far better than your humble blogger:

An Open Letter to the People Known as Members of Britain's University and College Union
Eli E. Hertz | May 31, 2007

Writing this letter is a good way for me to discuss your horrible denial of facts and the disrespect that you bestow on your parents, grandparents and your British people's history.

Did you know that your government was the leading force among the fifty-one member countries - the entire League of Nations - that unanimously declared on July 24, 1922:
"Recognition Has Been Given to the Historical Connection of the Jewish People with Palestine and to the Grounds for Reconstructing their National Home in that Country."

Did you know that your country's hero Sir Winston Churchill had that to say about Jewish "Occupation" of Palestine:
"When it is asked what is meant by the development of the Jewish National Home in Palestine, it may be answered that it is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community, with the assistance of Jews in other parts of the world, in order that it may become a centre in which the Jewish people as a whole may take, on grounds of religion and race, an interest and a pride."

My friend - the British world of academia: It is not "The Occupation" Arabs reject; they reject the right of Israel to exist as a legitimate, secure, Jewish political entity and you choose to collaborate with this call to genocide.

Palestinian Arabs have underscored their rejectionism with wave after wave of terrorism at every juncture - that is, before the 1967 Six-Day War and even prior to the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, and this too is being ignored by you. READ THE REST...

If we talk academically, you would be most interested in how your people described Jewish academic's achievement in a visit to Jewish Palestine in 1937:
"The Daniel Sieff Research Institute [today part of the Weitzman Institute of Science] at Rehovot is equipped with the most delicate modern instruments; the experiments conducted there are watched by chemists all over the world: yet from its windows can be seen the hills inhabited by a backward peasantry [Palestinian Arabs] who regard it only as the demonstration of a power they hate and fear and who would like, no doubt, when their blood is up, to destroy it."

You should ask yourself: What kind of a society do you support? - A society that consciously and purposely sacrifices its own youth for political gain and tactical advantage. Today the overwhelming majority of Palestinian Arabs nurture a blind hatred of Israel. They created a cultural milieu of vengeance, violence and death - preparing their children to be sacrifices in a death cult - your silence is noticed.

I suggest you tell your Palestinian friends to invest in Biotech, not bombs. Build computer chips, not Kasam rockets. Teach medicine, not hate. Look to the future, not the past. Stop blaming Americans and Jews for all their problems, and take responsibility for their own actions.

My British academic: Do you fully comprehend what you are doing? If you are indeed aware that the path you have embarked on leads to hate and destruction, and if you have freely chosen to walk in that direction, then you and your Arab friends are truly beyond hope.

Before you continue to dishonor your own history, think it over.

Eli E. Hertz, New York.

(Reprinted from email)
Britain's obsessive boycotters
GERALD M. STEINBERG, THE JERUSALEM POST
May. 29, 2007

While Israelis are targeted by rockets from Gaza and officials from the "elected Palestinian government" threaten attacks by female suicide bombers, calls for anti-Israeli boycotts based on human rights claims would appear to be both immoral and absurd.

But the small group that controls Britain's trade unions has managed to combine both traits, and it is escalating its political warfare in parallel with Palestinian violence. A vote on yet another anti-Israel boycott proposal is scheduled to take place at the end of May, this time by the Universities and Colleges Union (UCU).

This is the third such academic boycott campaign in Britain in two years, coming after a divestment debate within the Anglican Church, a "boycott Israel" movement led by British activists in the World Medical Association, and the adoption of a similar program by the National Union of Journalists. Beyond the obvious violations of the academic process inherent in a political boycott, this effort is part of a carefully prepared strategy aimed at isolating the Jewish state.

The crucial difference, however, between the previous attempts and the current boycott battles, including the UCU effort, is the presence of a serious counterweight on the political battlefield to challenge the anti-Israel and often anti-Semitic slogans and myths.

Sober and morally-minded British academics on the Left, led by a group known as Engage, as well as the "Fair Play Campaign Group," are particularly active. And under the IAB (International Advisory Board for Academic Freedom), many Israeli academics have also become active in countering the pervasive propaganda and misinformation.

FOR THE radicals, including obsessive ideologues affiliated with the Socialist Workers Party, history, facts and details are irrelevant. While always invoking "the occupation," the decades of Arab warfare, terrorism, incitement and rejectionism are erased from the record. This is not the result of ignorance but of willful conviction, and nothing will change their anti-Israel, anti-US and anti-democracy agendas. They will continue to use terms such as "apartheid" and "racist" to demonize Israel.

As made clear in recent statements, it is Israel's existence that they reject, and not specific policies.

However, the main purpose of the confrontations between boycott opponents and advocates is not to convince the fanatics, but to address the much larger group that knows very little about Israel and the conflict. After many years of avoidance, in the false hope that the absurdity of these boycotts against Israel would become obvious, there is now a coherent strategy that has a chance of success.

Via vigorous debate, the goal is to encourage those who are not obsessed by Israel to break with the radicals. In trade union votes, these moderate voices will determine the outcome, and persuading many of the injustice inherent in the one-sided singling-out of Israel can defeat the boycott resolutions.

This is a formidable task. The impact of the radical fringe has been greatly magnified by powerful non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in Britain that have also been campaigning for years. Well-financed pressure groups such as War on Want, Christian Aid, World Vision, Pax Christi, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch take the lead in singling out and systematically condemning Israel. They repeat the same invented histories, claiming that Israel was "founded in sin," and use invented evidence to condemn Israeli responses to terrorism and aggression. Many journalists who share these prejudices repeat the claims at face value.

AS A result, those who know little about Israel or the Palestinians accept the agendas of the activists. Having heard so much about Israeli "disproportionate response" against attacks from Hizbullah and Hamas, and about the "apartheid wall" (as opposed to a security barrier that has prevented untold attacks by Palestinian suicide bombers), members of the union leadership who focus on other issues accept the attacks against Israel.

There is evidence that some members of this group are beginning to question the obsessive anti-Israel propaganda. In 2005, after the leaders of the Association of University Teachers voted to endorse the boycott, members forced a second vote, which resulted in a reversal. They realized that a partisan boycott was unjust and antithetical to the principles of academic freedom. (A similar re-vote in the case of a second union - NATFHE - was avoided when this group dissolved in a merger with the AUT to become the UCU).

In the Anglican Church, in which the politics resembles the trade union movement, a majority of the leaders overturned the attempt to become involved in a one-sided and counterproductive political attack. More recently, many members of the National Union of Journalists are demanding a revote after being embarrassed by the obvious pro-Palestinian bias formally adopted by their organization, which showed that British media coverage of the Middle East was systematically biased.

These changes, while relatively small, demonstrate that attempts to demonize and boycott Israel are not inevitable, and that the inherently immoral and absurd nature of such campaigns can be exposed.

The writer directs the Program on Conflict Management at Bar-Ilan University, and heads 'NGO Monitor.'

(Reprinted from email)
SHAME ON THE LEFT AND ITS VICIOUS HATRED OF ISRAEL
DAILY EXPRESS
Thursday May 31,2007
Leo McKinstry

ANTI-RACISM is supposed to be one of the guiding principles of our society, preventing discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin or nationality.

Yet it is a bizarre paradox of modern Britain that there is now a climate of increasing hostility towards Jews, particularly in those Left-wing intellectual circles which otherwise make a fetish of their concern for racial sensitivities.

Dressed up as criticism of the state of Israel, anti-Semitism is becoming not just tolerated but even fashionable in some of our civic institutions, including the universities and parts of the media.

Thanks to the Left's neurotic hatred of Israel, we now have the extraordinary sight of self-styled liberal campaigners launching McCarthyite witch-hunts against anyone deemed to have Israeli connections, as in this week's debate at the University and College Union's annual conference at Bournemouth calling for a boycott of all Israeli academic institutions.

Respect for democracy, individual rights and freedom of speech are being crushed beneath the juggernaut of shrill indignation.

What is particularly disturbing is the way opposition to the Jewish state descends into vicious antagonism against Jews themselves, as shown by this sickening recent outburst from writer Pamela Hardyment, a member of the National Union of Journalists, which in April voted to boycott Israeli goods.

Explaining her support for the NUJ's stance, Ms Hardyment described Israel as a wonderful Nazi-like killing machine backed by the world's richest Jews.

Then, like some lunatic from the far-Right, she referred to the so-called Holocaust before concluding: Shame on all Jews, may your lives be cursed.

Such words could have come straight from Hitler or the most fervent supporter of Osama Bin Laden.

But Ms Hardyment is hardly unique.

This sort of seething resentment can be found throughout the Left, whether in demands that Israel be treated as a pariah state or in connivance at anti-Semitic propaganda. Typical of this approach was the opinion of Ulster poet and darling of the BBC Tom Paulin, who once argued that Jewish settlers in Israel should be shot dead. They are Nazis, racists. I feel nothing but hatred for them.

Yet Paulin would no doubt be outraged if some English extremist uttered the same sentiments about radical Muslims settling in Britain.

One of the most nauseating rhetorical devices used by hysterical campaigners such as Paulin and Hardyment is to draw an analogy between the Nazi regime and the modern government of Israel.

Such a link is not only historically absurd, since Israel is by far the most democratic and liberal country in the Middle East, but it is also offensive because it demonises the Jews and devalues the horror of the Holocaust.

The pretence that Israel's actions in its own defence against Islamic terrorists are somehow the equivalent of Nazi Germany's gas chambers is a lie worthy of Dr Goebbels himself. And the tragedy is that this continual assault on Israel has led to a rise in anti-Semitism in Britain, much of it fuelled by Islamic radicals.

In 2006 there were 594 anti-Semitic race-hate incidents in this country, a 31 per cent rise on 2005 and the highest total since records began in 1984.

I should perhaps stress that I do not come from a Jewish family. Like Tom Paulin, I hail from the Belfast middle-class. But I have been repelled by the anti-Semitism "disguised as support for the Palestinians" of parts of the British Left.

I first became aware of this nasty phenomenon when, in 1985, I attended the annual conference of the National Union of Students at Blackpool. There I was appalled to hear delegates calling for a ban on student Jewish societies, on the grounds that because such groups supported the state of Israel they were essentially fascistic in nature.

Yet, more than 20 years later, this sort of intolerance is no longer confined to the student debating floor. It now exists in large swathes of education, the press and the arts.

The boycott of Israel by academics was started by Professor Stephen Rose of the Open University, like Paulin another BBC favourite,who told his colleagues that you have no right to treat Israel as if it were a normal state.

The boycott is now so widespread that, in one grotesque incident, an Israeli PhD student had his application for Oxford initially rejected purely because he had served in his country's army.

The professor dealing with the case, Andrew Wilkie, said he had a huge problem with Israelis taking the moral high ground from their appalling treatment in the Holocaust and then inflicting gross human rights abuses on Palestinians.

Professor Wilkie would not have dreamt of turning down a Zimbabwean because of Mugabe's tyranny, or a Chinese applicant because of his own opposition to the occupation of Tibet.

This is what is so contemptible about the intellectuals' fixation with Israel.

They are guilty of the most bizarre double standards.

While they scream about the Jewish state, they remain silent about human rights abuses carried out by brutal regimes across the world.

And it is ironic that, on the day the lecturers debated a boycott of Israel, they also voted to refuse to co-operate with any attempt to crack down on radical Islam on campuses, claiming such a move would be an infringement of free speech.

Given some of the lecturers' enthusiasm for silencing Israeli opinion such a position is laughable in its hypocrisy.

United by anti-Semitism, the bigots of the academic Left and Muslim fundamentalism are destroying freedom of thought in this country.

Britain's Boycott Craziness Comes Back To The Academic World

2007-05-31T17:25:00.000+03:00

Why Israel will always be vilified

It is convenient for many British liberals that Israel exists. It saves them from examining the manifest failings in their own actions.
David Aaronovitch
Sunday April 24, 2005
The Observer

Last Friday saw two examples of intelligent people behaving in a futile way. The first was the decision by the US Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, to seek the death penalty for would-be suicide terrorist, Zacharias Moussaoui. Not only does such a sentence confer on Moussaoui precisely the heroic end that he was seeking (did Gonzales never read Brer Rabbit?), but it would also deprive the authorities of a potentially valuable source of information and psychological insight. All it does is make some Americans feel better.

And then there was the decision of the Association of University Teachers council in Eastbourne to boycott two (perhaps three) Israeli universities, the futility of which I now hope to prove.

Let us first look at the stated objectives of the boycott. What does it seek to achieve? The literature of the campaign suggests that these objectives, far from being focused, are many and nebulous. They are, according to the motion's prime mover, Sue Blackwell of the English Department of Birmingham University, variously to 'add to the pressure on the country's economy and dent its international prestige'; to send a 'message of support to students and colleagues in Palestine'; and to act as 'consciousness-raising' for British academics who, through the boycott, can be brought to realise how the world really is. A sort of speculum for their hidden political organs.

The boycott seems also to be simultaneously aimed at the Israeli system in toto, and at the specific misdeeds of particular institutions - Haifa University for political censorship, Bar-Ilan for having relations with the illegal settlements on the West Bank, and the Hebrew University for pulling down Arab houses to build student dormitories. [ed. I live across the street from these dorms. NOT ONE ARAB HOUSE was torn down for the new dormitories. Hebrew University simply took back land, from Arabs who were SQUATTING on the land, that has LEGALLY belonged to Hebrew University since before Israel was created. Of course, the British ignore the fact that Palestinians {Jerusalem Palestinians} learn at Hebrew University freely, and a large percentage of my school and all Israeli universities and colleges is comprised of Arabs AND Palestinians.] The AUT executive is 'investigating' this last accusation, but the scope of these targets probably reflects the campaigners' need to maximise support for their motion.

So, according to the disclosed agenda, somehow or other, the boycott will make Israeli academics think again about their support for the system, thus strengthening the forces of progress and justice. It will make Palestinians feel better, it will make Sue Blackwell feel better, it will help. READ THE REST...

But will it? On Friday morning, the participants in the council meeting may have read an article in the Guardian by the progressive Israeli writer, Etgar Keret. He recalled how the Manchester academic, Mona Baker, sacked his translator, Miriam Schlesinger, from the board of Baker's journal, the Translator. Keret reflected on the irony. Schlesinger was the former head of Amnesty International in Israel, as well as being a peace activist. Keret added: 'Baker was not the first to call for a boycott of [Miriam's] academic work. Israeli right wingers had been irked by her signature on some petition and had called upon students at Israeli universities to refrain from attending classes given by her and others of her ilk.'

If the AUT delegates read Keret's appeal, just over half of them ignored it. And now, if they have their way, the Schlesingers of this world will be routinely boycotted unless, according to the terms of the motion, they show sufficient individual zeal in the cause of justice of the Palestinians. Sufficient zeal as judged by whom? We have no idea.

Meanwhile, back in Israel, you can easily imagine whose position is strengthened by the AUT boycott. And it isn't that of the academics most sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. Look at the Europeans! Once again, they have singled Israel out for special treatment! Who can we trust but ourselves? In the United States, far more important to Israel than we will ever be, it will add grist to the arguments of those who want to support Israel at all hazards and under all circumstances.

So why do something so obviously counterproductive? The AUT delegates will have been reminded of the intolerable conditions of many of those living under Israeli occupation. They will have felt the emotional tug of those stories of checkpoint humiliations, collective punishments and the shooting of civilians. They'll have seen pictures of the wall. The motion may make them feel better. Warmer.

After the vote had been won, Blackwell, a former Christian fundamentalist turned revolutionary socialist, told the press how glad she was to be part of a union that was 'prepared to stand up for human rights'. The problem here, as she will have realised, is that if the AUT was to boycott places with bad human rights records, there'd be a whole lot of boycottin' goin' on. She has tried in the past to finesse this difficulty, at one point arguing: 'You cannot talk about academic freedom and free debate in Israel in the same way you can talk about it in the UK, or in almost any other country in the world.'

This sunniness is rather obviously absurd. There is a significant level of academic freedom and debate in Israel, flawed though it may be, compared with much of the rest of the world. Take just one country, Tunisia, which has a run-of-the-mill torturing authoritarian regime and no debate in its universities at all. Yet it wouldn't surprise me if many academics at Birmingham University have holidayed there, completely unhindered by Sue Blackwell. And then, of course, there's China.

No, Israel's universities are not bad and Israel's human rights record is no worse than that of many other countries. So, inevitably, the tack shifts. Israel's universities are intrinsically racist, according to Blackwell, with 'Israeli academics routinely implicated in racist discourses against Arab students and Arabs in general'.

And that's because there is something utterly unique about Israel itself, which marks it out from the merely abusive North Koreas and Irans. It has become an apartheid state, as South Africa was. And it, therefore, should be treated in the same way, with boycotts and disinvestments.

This is a genuinely, grade-A stupid argument, whether it emanates from the lips of Professor Steven Rose or the more sacred ones of Archbishop Desmond Tutu. In itself, Israel is not anything like South Africa, where a majority was denied all political and civic rights on the grounds of race. What is analogous, however, is Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories, which bears comparison with South Africa's occupation of Namibia or, some might say, Serbia's occupation of Kosovo.

So the object of those wanting peace and justice in the Middle East is to bring about an end to that occupation, and enable the establishment of a viable, contiguous Palestinian state. It is to persuade both sides that such a settlement is practical and to persuade both sides to make the difficult sacrifices that are necessary. It is to build confidence between Jews and Palestinians, and to strengthen, always, the hand of the peacemakers.

Unless, of course, you don't believe that Israel has the right to exist as a Jewish state at all within any borders. And this, as it happens, seems to be the view of Sue Blackwell, who describes Israel as 'an illegitimate state'. Unlike the United Nations, she does not believe it should have been set up and she would rather it disappeared. As she pointed out in 2003 to a previous AUT council: 'From its very inception, the state of Israel has attracted international condemnation for violating the human rights of the Palestinian people and making war on its neighbours.' Or, to put it even more bluntly, everything is all the fault of the Israelis.

The problem is that many Jews understand very well that this is her view and, unfortunately, will believe that it is also the view of all her fellow campaigners. Consequently, there will now be a battle royal (of which this article is part) about the rights and wrongs of these particular tactics, and the bigger picture will inevitably be lost. Everyone will return to their trenches and take the tarpaulins off their heaviest and most inaccurate artillery.

However, there may be a saving grace. Two years ago, Blackwell predicted that Tony Blair would be ousted at the next general election over Iraq. But if not: 'Then it may well be time for international pressure to be brought to bear, since the British electorate will have failed in their moral duty'.

So, one last reason, perhaps, to vote Labour on Thursday week. To enjoy the sight of Sue Blackwell busily boycotting herself.

It's very simply here people. Why is Israel boycotted and vilified so much? BECAUSE it's the only democracy in the Middle East. Our society and press is open for for all to see. The true bad guys, despots, tyrants, the REAL Human Rights violators are NOT. Saudi Arabia doesn't have a free and open society. Hell, even Gaza doesn't have a free press. Why is no British academic standing up and calling for the boycott of Palestinians universities that openly and wantonly preach the destruction of Israel and the killing of Israeli/Jewish civilians. Both of which are a hell of a lot more clearly in violation of international law than Israel's "occupation". No, no outcry against that. Why? Because as this article points out, these people are IN FAVOR of the destruction of the Jewish State and "sympathize" and understand the call to murder Jews. There's no need to boycott them. No, only Israel. The country that helps all the European and Western liberals feel all warm and fuzzy inside, as if their constant vilification of Israel makes them feel as if they've actually done something to help the world. Unfortunately, in contradiction to their predisposed stupidity, they're actually making the world a more dangerous place to live by boycotting the good guys and embracing the bullies, the murderers, and the thugs. Fortunately for us, when the radical Muslims take over Europe, they're going to go after and eliminate people like Sue Blackwell first.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Britain, UK, Boycott, Unversity, Academic, Sue+Blackwell, Gaza, West+Bank, Palestinian, Arab

In This Case, The Lebanese Army Is Applauded Instead Of Being Condemned

2007-05-30T12:35:00.001+03:00

What's going in Lebanon right now is a perfect example of the hypocrisy, double standards, and utter Antisemitism that is thrown at the Jews and the Jewish State. Palestinians are being killed in a refugee camp in an effort to root out 100 or so terrorists. Only it's the Lebanese Army doing the killing, so instead of being condemned, they're being applauded and told to continue their efforts until the last terrorist is gunned down. Instead of calls for emergency UN Security Council meetings, the UN is applauding Lebanon's efforts. Instead of Lebanon's actions and "barbarism" being on the front page of every newspaper in the world, it's already been forgotten. Well, here's one reporter who gets it and isn't afraid to say it.

(Hat Tip: LGF)
Jenin comes to Lebanon. So where is the outcry?
Jonathan Kay
National Post
Tuesday, May 29, 2007

Last week, the Lebanese army attacked a squalid Palestinian refugee camp that's become infested with Islamist suicide terrorists and guerilla fighters. On May 20, government troops surrounded the camp, with tanks and artillery pieces shelling it at close range. Army snipers gunned down anything that moved. At least 18 civilians were killed, and dozens more injured. Water and electricity were cut off. By week's end, much of the camp had been turned into deserted rubble. Thousands of terrified residents fleeing the camp reported harrowing stories of famished, parched families trapped in their basements.

How did the rest of the world react? The Arab League quickly condemned "the criminal and terrorist acts carried out by the terrorist group known as Fatah al-Islam," and vowed to "give its full support to the efforts of the army and the Lebanese government." EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana also condemned Fatah al-Islam, and declared Europe's "support" for Lebanon. And the UN Security Council called the actions of Fatah al-Islam "an unacceptable attack" on Lebanon's sovereignty. As for the Western media, most outlets ignored the story following the first flurry of news reports.

At this point, please indulge me by re-reading the first paragraph of this column -- except this time, substitute the world "Israeli" for "Lebanese" in the first sentence. Let's imagine what the world's reaction would be if the ongoing siege were taking place in Gaza or the West Bank instead of the Nahr al Bared refugee camp on the outskirts of Tripoli, Lebanon. READ THE REST...

First of all, a flood of foreign journalists would descend on the camp to document Israel's cruelty and barbarism, and the story would remain front page news to this day. Al-Jazeera would be a 24/7 montage of grieving mothers swearing revenge on the Zionist butchers, and rumours would swirl of mass graves and poison gas. The Arab League, EU and United Nations would condemn Israeli aggression -- as would the editorial board of The New York Times. The Independent would dispatch Robert Fisk to embed with Fatah al-Islam. And the newspaper's cartoonist, Dave Brown, would produce another award-winning rendition of his signature theme: Jews eating Palestinian babies.

Actually, we don't need to speculate: What I have just written is exactly what happened when the Israeli army invaded the Jenin refugee camp to root out terrorists in April, 2002, a battle that was similar in scale to this month's siege at Nahr al Bared. (At Jenin, 52 refugee camp residents were killed -- most of them gunmen, according to Human Rights Watch. At Nahr al Bared, the figure is 45 and climbing.) The main difference between the two sieges is that Israel's army put its troops at far greater risk by invading Jenin with infantry -- whereas the less humane Lebanese army has simply pummelled Nahr al Bared with explosives from a distance. Jews apparently care a lot more about saving Palestinian civilians than do Lebanese soldiers.

For years, we have been told that Palestinian suffering and "humiliation" is at the root of the Middle East conflict, as well as the Western-Muslim clash of civilizations more generally. This is nonsense: The 200,000-plus Palestinian refugees who live in Lebanese camps are treated worse than dogs -- with no access to decent schools or good jobs -- and no one in the Arab world cares a whit. In fact, many Arabs seem to embrace the same blind anti-Palestinian hatred of which Israel is typically accused. When Lebanese armoured personnel carriers rolled through Tripoli on May 20, they got a standing ovation from local residents. "We wish the government would destroy the whole camp and the rest of the camps," one local told The New York Times. "Nothing good comes out of the Palestinians."

Just as Lebanon's stew of eternally warring Sunnis, Shiites, Christians, Hezbollah terrorists and militarized clans serves as a Mediterranean microcosm for the political dysfunction of the Arab world, this month's events capture perfectly the utter cynicism of the Islamic world's trumped up vilification of Israel, and the West as a whole. As with the Muslim- on-Muslim slaughter in Darfur, Iraq, Pakistan, Gaza and a dozen other hot spots, the siege at Nahr al Bared shows that what inflames "the Muslim street" (for lack of a better cliche) isn't Muslim suffering, but the relatively tiny fraction thereof that jihadi propagandists and their Western apologists can lay at the feet of Jews and Christians.

Muslim blood apparently comes cheap -- but only when it's drawn by other Muslims.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Lebanon, UN, United+Nations, Refugee, Camp, Palestinian, Gaza, West+Bank, Terror, Terrorist, Arab, Muslim, Jihad, Jihadi, Jew, Christian

Why No Outcry From Human Rights Activists???

2007-05-30T11:49:00.000+03:00

Because, IT'S NOT ISRAEL BEHIND THE CRIME!!! Palestinian terrorists fire rockets from civilian area into civilian areas, yet there are no outcries from Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, or Oxfam about violations of International Law or Humanitarian Law or Geneva Conventions. Not only are the rockets fired randomly into civilian areas to randomly kill as many non-combatants as possible, but the majority of rockets fired LAND RIGHT BACK INTO THE CIVILIAN AREAS THEY WERE SHOT FROM!! Killing, harming, or maiming their own people. Yet, not a peep! Are these organizations really objective in their goals and practices? Their silence speaks volumes.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Palestinian, Terror, Terrorist, Amnesty+International, Human, Rights, Watch, Oxfam

Top 10 Reasons Why Israel Is Like No Other

2007-05-28T11:52:00.000+03:00

And, this only refers to the United Nations!! This isn't even a 10 list of how Israel is treated differently in the MEDIA!! Do you have a top 10 list?!? Share it with us.

May 09 2007; 02:05PM
Ten Ways Israel Is Treated Differently
Posted by David Harris

David Letterman is a popular late-night talk-show host in the United States. Both he and his guests have been known to come up with their top-ten lists, mostly intended to elicit laughs from the viewing audience.

I also carry around my top-ten list, though, sad to say, there’s nothing remotely funny about it. It catalogs the ways in which Israel is treated differently than other nations.
Here’s my list. I’d invite readers to suggest other examples that particularly irk them.

First, Israel is the only UN member state whose very right to exist is under constant challenge. Notwithstanding the fact that Israel was created with the imprimatur of the UN and has been a member of the world body since 1949, there is a relentless chorus of nations, institutions and individuals denying Israel’s very political legitimacy. No one would dare question the right to exist of Libya, Saudi Arabia or Syria. Why is it open hunting season on Israel, as if we didn’t know the answer?

Second, Israel is the only UN member state that’s been publicly targeted for annihilation by another UN member state. Think about it. The Iranian president calls for wiping Israel off the map. Is there any other country that faces such an open call for genocidal destruction?

Third, Israel is the only nation whose capital city, Jerusalem, is not recognized by other nations. Imagine the absurdity of this. Foreign diplomats live in Tel Aviv while conducting virtually all their business in Jerusalem. Though no Western nation questions Israel’s presence in the city’s western half, where the prime minister’s office, Knesset and Ministry of Foreign Affairs are located, there are no embassies there. In fact, look at listings of world cities, including places of birth in passports, and you’ll often see something striking – Paris, France; Tokyo, Japan; Pretoria, South Africa; Lima, Peru; and Jerusalem, sans country – orphaned, if you will.

Fourth, the UN has two agencies that deal with refugees. One, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), focuses on all the world’s refugee populations, save one. The other, the United Nations Refugee and Works Administration (UNRWA), handles only the Palestinians. But the oddity goes further than two structures and two bureaucracies. They have two different mandates. UNHCR seeks to resettle refugees; UNRWA does not. When, in 1951, John Blanford, UNRWA’s director, proposed resettling up to 250,000 refugees in Arab countries, those countries refused, leading to his resignation. The message got through. No UN official since has pushed for resettlement.

Moreover, the UNRWA and UNHCR definitions of a refugee differ markedly. Whereas the UNHCR targets those who have fled their homelands, the UNRWA definition covers “the descendants of persons who became refugees in 1948,” without any generational limitations.

Fifth, Israel is the only country that has won all its major wars for survival and self-defense, yet it’s confronted by defeated adversaries who insist on dictating the terms of peace. In doing so, ironically, they’ve found support from many countries who, victorious in war, demanded – and got – border adjustments.

Sixth, Israel is the only country that has been censured by name – not once, but nine times – since the new UN Human Rights Council was established in June 2006. Astonishingly, or maybe not, this UN body has failed to adopt a single resolution critical of any real human rights abuser. When finally discussing the Darfur situation, the Council shamefully balked at pointing a finger at Sudan.

Seventh, Israel is the only country that, in violation of the spirit of the UN Charter, isn’t a full member of one of the five regional blocs – Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America, and West Europe and Others (WEOG) – that determine eligibility for candidacy for key UN posts. While Israel achieved a breakthrough in 2000 and joined WEOG, its membership is limited to New York, not other UN centers, and is both conditional and temporary.

Eighth, Israel is the only country that’s the daily target of three UN bodies established solely to advance the Palestinian cause and to bash Israel—the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People, and the Division for Palestinian Rights in the UN’s Department of Political Affairs.

Ninth, Israel is the only country that is the target of a boycott by the British-based National Union of Journalists. An earlier British boycott against Israeli academic institutions was voided on a technicality because the union that adopted the measure merged with another. There is now an incipient call by some in the British Medical Association to exclude its Israeli counterpart from the World Medical Association.

And tenth, Israel is the only country where some associated with its majority population, i.e., Jews, openly call, for political or religious reasons, to dismantle the state. Is there a comparable situation to those religious voices of Neturei Karta, for example, who traveled to Teheran to join publicly with a leader seeking Israel’s destruction, as well as those political extremists who seek to delegitimize the State of Israel and call for a “one-state” solution? Speaking of our own worst enemies…

Tackling any one of these ten, much less all of them, is a daunting challenge, to state the painfully obvious. And, as I suggested, this list is far from complete. But it gives a sense of what’s going on beyond the daily headlines.
The old ad used to say that you don’t have to be Jewish to love Levy’s Jewish rye bread. Well, surely, you don’t have to be an ardent pro-Israel activist to be troubled by the unjust treatment of Israel. All it takes is a capacity for outrage that things like this are going on before our very eyes.

Technorati Tags: Israel, UN, United+Nations, Palestinian, Arab, Human+Rights, Naturei+Karta

Israel Under Attack

2007-05-23T22:26:00.000+03:00

We'll how long it is before YouTube takes it off.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Sderot, Gaza, Hamas, Terror, Terrorist, Rocket

Israeli Doctors Give British Boycotters A Smackdown!!

2007-05-22T15:45:00.000+03:00

(Reprinted from email):

May 9, 2007

In a letter published in The Guardian in April, a group of British doctors called for a boycott of the Israeli Medical Association (IMA) and its expulsion from the World Medical Association (WMA) for allegedly failing to uphold international medical ethical standards in the Palestinian territories.

We, the representatives of medicine in Israel, categorically deny these accusations and wish to take a stand in support of the IMA and humane medical treatment for all in Israel.

It is all too clear that Dr. Derek Summerfield is once again feeding his own personal, systematic dislike of Israel and will persist in doing so regardless of the truth.

As for Dr. David Halpin, if the best he can do is quote Amira Hass: Life Under Israeli Occupation – published August 26, 2001 in The Independent, at the height of the Intifida, we suggest he undertakes a more up-to-date and thorough study of the situation, as described below.

Unfortunately, the other signatories were presumably unaware of the reality of the situation. We would therefore like to clarify some facts and provide an incomplete sampling of health activity aimed at helping the Palestinian population:
2,346 Palestinian children with birth defects were treated last year in Israeli hospitals (up from 1,604 in 2005), 29,919 Palestinian patients were granted permits to undergo medical treatments in hospitals in Israel (up from 24,076 in 2005), and 1,600 Palestinian emergency patients were transferred by ambulance from the PA to hospitals in Israel (up from 800 in 2005).

We would also like to reiterate what was expressed in a recent IMA letter: The IMA is not, and has never been, the 'executive arm of the Israeli establishment.' It is an apolitical organization that, like every other national medical organization, concerns itself with medical and health issues and not the establishment or support of any sort of political policy.

The IMA has continuously called for funds to be transferred [to the PA] not in kind but in the form of food and medicine so that help could be given where it is truly needed.

In addition to the above, hundreds or thousands of Palestinian patients receive medical care in Israel each year, usually at a cost absorbed by the Israeli government. As an example, in 2004, NIS 36,645,507 (approximately 8,143,446 USD at the time) of PA debts to Israeli hospitals were offset. The IMA has intervened on occasions where a patient was about to be evicted from an Israeli hospital for lack of funds. The IMA has also intervened on many occasions of Palestinian patients, physicians, and medical students who encountered difficulties at Israeli checkpoints, including petitions to the High Court of Justice on certain matters. Israeli doctors learn and work side by side with their Arab colleagues, treating both Jewish and Arab patients, Israeli and Palestinian. Sometimes these very same dedicated physicians meet their death at the hands of terrorists, leaving their Palestinian patients to wonder who will care for them.

The organization has, at several points in the past, attempted to meet with its Palestinian counterparts in an effort to foster mutual cooperation and better understanding, including the release of a joint statement. Almost none of these meetings have taken place, because of refusal on the Palestinian side.

In addition to the above, there are numerous collaborative health care initiatives taking place at any time. The First International Congress on Chronic Disorders in Children was attended in April by 300 Israeli and 100 Palestinian doctors and the First Middle East Symposium on Dental Medicine represented a further expression of the relationship launched between the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Al-Quds University.

Under the Israeli program "Save a Child's Heart", doctors at Wolfson Hospital repair congenital heart defects for children from the Palestinian territories, Iraq, Jordan and Africa; more than 1,000 children, about half from Gaza and the occupied West Bank, have been helped so far by the program.

Teams at Bethlehem University and at Tel-Aviv University have worked together to investigate the genetic causes of deafness. A new graduate program will enable Palestinian students to pursue post-graduate research in this field at Tel-Aviv University .

Jerusalem's Hadassah hospital has trained Palestinian physicians and nurses in cancer treatments, and staff from this hospital and Palestinian hospitals exchange ideas and information on an ongoing basis.

It saddens us greatly to see and hear of Palestinian civilians receiving inadequate health care, including in Gaza, from which Israel unilaterally withdrew in 2006. It saddens us that funds transferred to the Palestinian leadership are often used for guns and bombs instead of for hospitals and medicines. It saddens us that terrorists kill or maim our civilians, kidnap our soldiers, rain missiles on Israeli cities, and then hide among civilians and civilian structures such as hospitals. And it pains us that terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians (including terrorists posing as ill people in need of medical care) result in security measures that sometimes cause hardship to innocent Palestinians. We do our best to help whenever possible, despite these constraints, and have often called for a separation of political and humane issues, so that no one suffers from the current conflict.

The "facts" expressed in the letter of the Palestinian organizations calling for a boycott of the IMA, are a far cry from reality. It is our hope that your readers will form unbiased opinions and recognize the steps that Israeli doctors are taking to improve the health and treatment of all peoples, regardless of race or religion. Those who have preconceived opinions will undoubtedly stick with them. But for those who want the truth, we have attempted to present it.

Sincerely,

Dr. Yoram Blachar, President, IMA

Prof. Shai Ashkenazi, Chairman, Scientific Council, IMA & Director Pediatrics A, Schneider Children's Medical Center, Israel

Professor Shmuel C. Shapira MD MPH, Hadassah Deputy Director General
Director Hebrew University-Hadassah School of Public Health

Dr. Jacob Yahav , Director, Kaplan Medical Center
Prof. Zvi Zemishlany, Director - Geha Mental Health Center

Meir Oren M.D., M.Sc., M.P.H Director – General, The Hillel - Yaffe Medical Center

Zvi Stern m.d.Director Hadassah Medical Center- Mt. Scopus
Prof. Jacob Hart, Director (CEO), Loewenstein Hospital Rehabilitation Center, Raanana, Israel

Dr. Orna Blondheim, Director, Haemak Medical Center, Afula

Dr. Raphi Pollack, Medical Director, Bikur Cholim Hospital, Jerusalem

SCHARF SHIMON M.D.,M.P.H., Director of the Barzilai Med. Ctr.Ashkelon

Yehuda Baruch MD MHA, Director General, Abarbanel Mental Health Center, Israel

Amos Etzioni MD, Professor of Pediatrics and Immunology
Director - Meyer Children's Hospital, Bat- Galim, Haifa

Nicky Liebermann M.D., Head – Community Medical Division, "Clalit" Health Services, Israel

Technorati Tags: Israel, Britain, Doctor, Medicine, Palestinian, Hospital, Gaza, West Bank

Tel-Aviv Firefighter Gets It With A Few Simple Words

2007-05-20T13:15:00.000+03:00

A Tel-Aviv firefighter volunteering to help the fledgling fire station in Sderot handle all the fires and damages inflicted by the countless Kassam rockets being fired into Israel's populated cities has this to say about what's going on. It definitely qualifies as the best succinct description of the situation today.
(Source: J Post):
"They are like cockroaches, these guys who fire the rockets. You kill them and others take their place... there won't be peace between us and them, there's not even peace between them and themselves."

Technorati Tags: Tel+Aviv, Sderot, Israel, Kassam, Gaza, Rocket, Peace

Where Has Summer Gone???

2007-05-16T14:14:00.000+03:00

OK, I guess localized global warming strikes again. It's mid-May in Israel, and it's pouring rain and HAILING outside right now. What gives?!?

My First Yom Yerushalyim Parade

2007-05-16T12:24:00.000+03:00

Sometimes, work has more perks than just a paycheck. The husband and I work in the center of Jerusalem, right on the corner of Yafo and Agripus. So, we're really right on the middle of everything. We work weird hours. Most days, it's from 4:00PM-12:30AM, and other days, we work from 7:30AM-4:00PM. For the past week, I had been pretty bummed that we would have to work on both nights of Yom Yerushalyim, when all the parades and festivals were going on. Well, we got around that very nicely last night. The parade down Yafo and King George, to celebrate 40 glorious of the reunification of Jerusalem, started at 6:00. So, at about 6:30, the husband and I took our breaks and walked down the street and got to enjoy most of the parade. I'm going to put up some pictures. It was awesome and a lot of fun. There were kids marching from every regional council in the country. There were floats and music. It was just great. I was very saddened to hear that Jerusalem doesn't put on a parade for Yom Yerushalyim every year. They did this year for the 40th anniversary. I think they should have this every year.

Anyways, it doesn't stop there. After we got off work at 12:30, we decided that we were going to check on the other goings-on. The Yom HaStudent concert was over, and the concert in Gan Sacher was clearing out. But, the events at the Kotel were just about to get under way. So, we drove over there. We were going to stay for the whole thing, but it started to rain and got really cold that we decided to go home. All in all, it was such an awesome day. And, WE STILL WORKED 8.5 HOURS!!!

Technorati Tags: Jerusalem, Yom+Yerushalyim, Anniversary, Kotel, Western+Wall, Wailing+Wall, Yaffa+Street, Parade, Israel

New Nephew Joins The Fold

2007-05-12T21:36:00.000+03:00

Hey all, on Thursday afternoon, my sister gave birth to her fourth kid: a beautifully big almost 9 lb. baby boy. Here are some pic.s of the newest member of the family. It's 6th among the nephews and nieces.

Lessons Of The Past

2007-05-10T20:20:00.000+03:00

I know that Shimon Peres doesn't believe in the concept of learning anything from history, and if he had his way, he'd strike history from the Israeli education system. But, hey, when's the last time Peres has been right about anything...?

Benjamin Netanyahu
Date published: 10/5/2007

Today, all free peoples have reason to celebrate. The much heralded thousand-year Reich lasted barely a dozen. Today, the British celebrate the defense of their liberty. The French, the Belgians, the Dutch, and many others celebrate the restoration of their liberty. And the Americans celebrate the salvation of liberty itself.

But for the Jews, even a day of Nazi defeat is bittersweet. For we know that the joy of their demise can never compensate for the horrors perpetrated on our people. Six decades after World War II, there are more British alive than there were before that war began. There are more French. There are more Russians. There are more Germans. But there are fewer Jews.

And what makes the pain of this memory even sharper is that it was a horror that was preventable.

First, it could have been prevented had the State of Israel been established earlier. After World War I, the British were entrusted by the League of Nations to create a Jewish national home. They reneged on that commitment, and instead appeased Arab terror by closing the gates on those fleeing Hitler.

Without a sovereign state of our own -- and therefore without real power -- the Jews were ultimately placed at the mercy of others. And there was little mercy for the Jews.

Second, the horror could have been prevented had the democratic world confronted Hitler in time. But plagued by the memory of WWI and intent on doing everything to avoid conflict, the free world’s pacifism ensured that there would be conflict.

Hitler’s rhetoric was met by incredulity, his brazenness was met by timidity, and his boldness was met by cowardice.

What changed for Hitler in the 1930s were not his goals, but his assessment over how strong the obstacles would be to achieving them. That is why each retreat, each compromise, each concession was met by more and more demands.

By the time the world understood that there was no choice but to confront him, it would be too late for tens of millions. They would die amid the rubble of Stalingrad, on the beaches of Normandy and worst of all, in the gas chambers of Auschwitz.

Victory over Hitler and the Nazis would have always come at a price – but it could have been a far less costly one.

It would have been less costly had the policy of appeasement in the 1930s been considered foolishness and not statesmanship. It would have been less costly had the leadership in the democratic world recognized the peril facing their countries and the urgent need to thwart that peril.

Let us remember that the world has applauded foolishness before. Let us remember that while today Chamberlain is a caricature, he was once hailed as a hero. Let us remember that the best and the brightest of three generations ago were wrong – dead wrong – in their belief that peace with Hitler’s Germany was possible.

Israel’s leaders in particular must remember these lessons of the past because our margin for error in the present is so small. Because we are a small state in a hostile region, we must recognize dangers before others would. We must mobilize the means to counter those dangers faster than others would. And we must act to thwart that danger sooner than others would.

In the last few years, we have already seen the tragedy that is wrought by false hope and magic solutions. Our enemies are real and they declare their intentions openly. Yet as was true decades ago, those who point out these dangers are called fearmongers and prophets of doom.

But the truth, a truth we recognize today, is just the opposite. It was those who clearly saw the dangers and those who courageously confronted those dangers who ultimately brought their people victory and hope.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Netanyahu, Britain, France, America, United+States, Hitler, Germany, Nazi, Terror, Arab

Schooling the Muqata's Guide to Cool Sports Vehicles

2007-05-09T12:15:00.000+03:00

In an attempt to school Holy Hyrax on what the definition of cool cars is, Jameel at the Muqata failed miserably, and while he may hate losing to a girl that really knows about cars, I will attempt here to school Jameel on what a cool sports car really is.

The first category is the super-car. Always ridiculously expensive, it is an elite brand of vehicle that must have several factors to become a super car. First, it must be ridiculously expensive. Second, it must be extremely to biblically fast. It must have above 300 bhp, and it must look really really cool; almost to the point of looking really weird. Oh yeah, and most of the time, they're impractical and break down a lot. But, the point is that they look amazing and make you feel like a child.
First up: The Swedish made Koenigsegg CCX

With over 700 bhp, this car is biblically fast. It looks the part. It's also got flames that shoot out of the back. It doesn't have to be bullet proof or go under water. At a top speed of about 200 mph, this baby can fly.

Next: Bugatti Veyron

With 1,001bhp, this car is the fastest legal street car in the world. It can actually do slightly more than 200mph. It has 4 turbo chargers and a W-16 engine, which is the equivalent of 2 V-8s. It has 10 radiators and a hydraulically powered rear spoiler. A technological masterpiece created by VW after they bought Bugatti, the Veyron was an engineering exercise to see if it could be done. Oh yeah, and the car is really comfortable and really reliable to drive; a rarity in the super car field. Selling at about 1 million dollars a car, it actually takes about 5 million dollars to build it, so VW is losing money on each car sold, but, again, only about 100 or so were made, just to see if it could be done. This car would eat a Lotus in under a second.

Our final lesson for the day: Zonda F

Zondas have always been known to be among the fastest cars or super-cars in the world. The Zonda F is a whole new bread and has only been topped by the Keunigsegg after it got a rear spoiler. The Zonda has over 600bhp to go with its hand built AMG V-12 engine. It's loud. It's audacious. It has no traction control. It's a super-car to the fullest. It's wide. It looks like it's from outer space, and its engine is exposed. What more could you ask for?!?

OK, that's all the time we have today. Stay tuned to our next episode where we'll be talking about the prettier of the super cars; namely Ferrari, Lamborghini, and the ever stead-fast Porsche.

Technorati Tags: Cars, Supercar, Bugatti, Zonda, Lotus, Porsche, Ferrari, Lamborghini

You Want To Interview Me???

2007-05-07T12:37:00.000+03:00

OK, that's not really true. I agreed to be interviewed. I volunteered to have Oleh Michael interview me with some questions for a meme. The rules are simple: Answer five questions, asked by the person from whom you received the meme, and allow folks to volunteer to be interviewed in turn. You can also read Oleh Michael's questions and answers. I want to make one program note before I pose my questions and answers. The husband and I have just, thank G-d, gotten a new full time job. The hours are a bit messed up, so posting regularly might be a bit of a problem until we get used to the schedules. Please be patient with us. Regularly scheduled programming will return shortly. Stay tuned!!!

1) Like me, you grew up in Michigan. What part, what are the 3 things about it that you miss the most, and what are the 3 things about it that you don't
miss at all?
I grew up about a mile and a half outside of Detroit. It's a small city
suburb called Oak Park. The 3 things I miss most about Oak Park? First is my
friends. There isn't a ton of stuff to do in Oak Park, so we were really
good at making our own fun, whether it was driving around for hours, hanging
out at the park, or hanging out at the 7-11, or just chillin' with a movie
at some-one's house, we knew how to make our own good time. I have a lot of
friends that still live in Oak Park, and I really miss them. The second
thing I miss the most is slurpees. Manhattan doesn't have a 7-11, and Israel
definitely does NOT have one. I really miss Slurpees. I haven't had one in
almost 4 years. The 3rd thing I miss most about about Oak Park is my family.
The reason they're last is because they're making Aliyah also, so I won't be
missing them for very much longer. As a consolation 3rd, I really miss being
able to watch my Red Wings at normal hours. I have to stay up to listen to
games that are on some times as late as 5 in the morning. It can be a bit
difficult. I still get to keep up to date. I just wish I could see the
games.
The 3 things I won't miss? The first thing is the community. My side of Oak
Park is very religious. The Yeshiva is right across the street from my
house. Any-one that didn't go to the super-orthodox school was considered
diverting from the path and sure to burn in hell. After my mom put us in a
modern orthodox Zionist day school, she had people in our neighborhood
stopping her on the street to tell her how bad of a mother she was for
taking us out of Yeshiva and Beis Yaakov. I also got looks and was called
names when I was seen wearing pants and hanging out with boys. The 2nd thing
I won't miss about Oak Park is the monotony. I always knew I didn't belong
there, and ever since seeing the drama and rolling hills and mountains of
northern Israel, I realize how BORING the suburbs can really be. The 3rd
thing I don't miss about Oak Park... there really isn't a 3rd thing. I just
didn't belong there, and I never liked the people. Other than that, it's a
great place to raise a family, if you like that kind of community. I have
nothing against it in that way.

2) As olim, it's a given that we all love Israel, but sometimes it can be
difficult. How long have you been here, and what have been the 3 greatest
challenges?
I have been here since November, 2004. The first greatest challenge by far
has been the language barrier. I have caught on in comprehension and
reading, but I'm the type of person that doesn't like to look or sound
stupid. So, it's been a rough going getting my confidence up well enough
where I feel comfortable having a conversation with someone in Hebrew. If
there would be a Ulpan program to do that, I'd take it in a second. The
second greatest challenge has been the driving. Honestly, I'm scared to get
my license because I'm really afraid to drive here. I'm not just talking
about the drivers, either. I'm also talking about the curves, the uphill
climbs, and the windy roads. The Midwest is totally flat, so I have no
experience navigating this type of terrain. I've been putting off getting my
license because of it. Also, because Kilometers are higher relative to its
speed in miles, I always feel that I'm going faster when I'm not. That's a
problem to get used to. I'm also looking for a good place to test. If anyone
has had any good experiences with a driving instructor and test location,
please let me know. I know everyone says that bureaucracy is a problem for
them, but I haven't had such a bad time with it. Actually, my 3rd biggest
challenge has been getting to understand the Israeli Parliamentary System. I
am very into politics and have only known a Presidential system. Getting
familiar and also getting comfortable with the Parliamentary system has been
a problem, and I have many problems with it. So, that's actually been a bit
frustrating for me.

3) I asked my other volunteer this one, but I like it, so: If you could have
the ear of one world leader for 10 minutes, and know that your advice would
be heeded, who would you talk to, what would you say, and why?
Oh man, this is a really tough question. I would have to say that because of
what's going on in the states today, with the war in Iraq being politicized
now, and our troops being used as pawns in the Democrats' political games, I
would have to say that I would talk to President Bush. I would tell him to
remind the nation what he said in the aftermath of 9/11; that this war
against terror would be long, it would outlast him and maybe our generation,
that it would be an arduous road that would cost lives. When he said it
then, the Democrats seemed to be in unity with him. But, I guess when they
said they knew it would be a long battle, they thought he meant no longer than
the 2 weeks it took to beat back Saddam back in the Gulf War, or that it
would take no longer than the time it takes to microwave a Hot Pocket. I would
tell him to tell the nation that if the U.S. troops abandon Iraq now, Iran
would simply fill the void, gain more power, and if that happened, there
would be almost no way to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon that
would be launched against Israel and the entire Western world. The Democrats
have repeatedly said that Iran is the real enemy, but they have no concept
of the big picture and can't comprehend that defeat in Iraq would be victory
in Iran. I would tell the President to continue to be strong, to be
resolute, shift and adapt his strategies for the needs of the country, but
to not allow himself to be beaten by the bullies that are actually waiting
with baited breath for the next soldier and Iraqi citizen to die, so they
can point a finger at the President and say "I told you so". I would tell
him that if they win, America is lost.

4) What great event in history do you wish you could have personally
witnessed?
The giving of the Torah at Har Sinai. Man, that must have been something. I know the Midrash says that all of our souls were there t bare wittness, but I would have liked to have really watched the whole event unfold.

5) If you could have two superpowers, what would they be, and why?
First would be regenerative powers. I am a big X-Men comics fan, and I think
Wolverine's power of regeneration would just be awesome. Secondly, I would
really love to fly. C'mon, to be able to beat rush hour traffic, that alone
is worth the power. Screw X-ray vision, give me the ability to soar.

Technorati Tags: Meme, Questions, Iraq, Israel, Aliyah

Golda Meir He Aint

2007-05-01T09:16:00.000+03:00

There really is no point discussing the aftermath and details of the Winograd Report. It didn't say anything we didn't already know since about Day 7 of the war. Olmert was inept, inexperienced, and gave the Army free reign because of it. Peretz was disgustingly inept, horrifically inexperienced, and incredibly stupid to even do the minimal aspects of the job of Minister of Defense. Halutz was a "fly boy" who had no conceptual knowledge of how to fight a ground war. He insisted on using air power, solely, to achieve his objectives, over the immense protest from the ground forces command. He refused to use the "book" that had been planned and practiced extensively for the exact scenario that occurred. He was disgustingly arrogant and refused to take anybody else's advise until it was too late to be effective. DUH!!!

We already knew all this. The only thing we have really learned here is how disgustingly arrogant and selfish our dear Prime Minister Olmert continues to be. In the immediate aftermath of the war, Olmert blamed every failure on his predecessors, and continued to toe the line that he did everything right. He was a lawyer to the very end. Now, when the proof of his responsibility and malfeasance is laid out, he still refuses to acknowledge his part in the whole debacle and continues to detract any semblance of accountability away from himself. He says the government made mistakes, and he won't resign, because he needs to stay and fix those errors. He refuses to acknowledge that the mistake was his; the error he needs to fix his himself. And, the only way to correct that error is to step down. In the aftermath of the Yom Kippur War, Golda Meir and Moshe Dayan, amongst others, knew that not only did they have to step down because of the their errors, but they had to step down in order to start the process of fixing the moralle of the country. Had they refused to resign, the country's faith in the government to do what's right for the people would have been shattered. Let's put it in plain terms here. Olmert doesn't give a damn about the people. He is delusional enough to think that if he can just stay in power until the end of his term, he'll be able to do something in order to regain some popularity. OK, let's put it in even plainer terms. He's a power hungry S.O.B., and he's not going to let anyone force him out of a seat he's spent more than 2 decades trying to sit in. READ THE REST...

However, at this point, it's no longer in Olmert's hands. He's dead in the water. It's just a matter of time until some-one fishes him out. Here's what Olmert is most likely going to do in order to regain some semblance of popularity or effectivity. He's going to make one last push to get Shalit back. The government is a laughing joke. Olmert believes that in order to get Kadima to keep in power, he has to ante up and prove he can run a government. I truly believe that within the week, we will little rumors flying that Olmert is caving in to the bloody demands of HAMAS in order to get Shalit back. How sad that it won't work. Olmert will still be kicked out, and thousands of murderers will be let out to put more blood directly on Olmert's hands. Shalit will be returned, but at the price of a selfish man willing to risk hundreds of lives for a few more days of reprieve.

Make no mistake about it. The Army's mistakes are being corrected and are being corrected well. The only this is happening is because Halutz had the presence of mind to finally call it quits and allow for a complete overhaul of the top echelons of the military. The government's mistakes can't be correct either until those responsible for those mistakes hold themselves accountable and step aside. Both Olmert and Peretz are a ticking time bomb waiting to go off, and not even a daring and dangerous rescue of Shalit can save them now.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Winograd, Report, Olmert, Halutz, Peretz, Shalit, Hamas, Army, Yom+Kippur+War, War

Two Lives Lost; One Sudden, The Other Expected: Both Surprises

2007-04-29T21:33:00.000+03:00

I really have nothing to write. I have just discovered that two very close friends of the family have passed away, both on the same day. One of them was one of my closest friends' Aunts, a mother to one of my sister's best friends, and a very close friend to the family. She's been ill for about 15 years now. She had a tumor in her spine that put her in a wheel-chair. Then, she developed a tumor in her brain. On Friday, it killed her. Later that day, my next door neighbor, that I've lived next to since I was born, died. She had gone into the hospital for an apparently routine procedure, but her heart stopped in the middle. She was barely 50. I grew up with her family my entire life and was close friends with several of her children. It was extremely sudden and unexpected. I'm just a bit in shock right now and can't write. So many people I know have passed away over the course of the past few months, I really don't know what to say anymore, so I just won't say anything...

Post Yom Ha'atzmaut Blues & YouTube Strikes Down The French Hill

2007-04-25T12:10:00.000+03:00

After mourning the loss of our precious soldiers and victims of terrorist attacks, then celebrating 59 years of Israel's miraculous existence, and then gorging on meat to express that gratitude and fact, it's time to get back to reality. Not too much reality, though, since school is still on strike. Anyways, now that I can barely move from all the BBQ and beer, I want to share a few thoughts with you about this year's mourning and celebration. First of all, and I've actually said this a million times and have said even BEFORE Aliyah was even a thought in my head, the United States' concept of Memorial Day for their Armed Forces is messed up. This opinion only became reinforced AFTER I made Aliyah and experienced my very first Yom HaZikaron. Now, I am a capitalist, BIG TIME, but I also believe in corporate responsibility and accountability. For the most part, I believe that a few bad apples in the bunch make the whole of corporations look bad, and the majority of corporations are very responsible and accountable. It's bad for business and profits to be otherwise. However, I really have to ask this question: How in the world is it that it is considered a proper commemoration of our soldiers by having SALES at every department, electric, and mom & pop store??? "Our Armed Forces have died so that you can shop 'till you drop!" Is that how it goes? There are no services or documentaries broadcast on basic cable. Because of the sales and merriment, I can very well say with a high degree of certainty that other than those families and friends that have lost service men and women, there are very few people that actually think about the men and women who have given their lives so that you could have your BBQ. They acknowledge that it's Memorial Day, but only in context of the sale they're going to at Best Buy. "Thanks Armed Forces! You gave your lives so that I can buy my HDDVD player at 25% off!" C'mon, people. This is why there are people spitting on troops in your country. No-one has taken the time to show the humanity and loss and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform. That's all I want to say about that. I don't want to lecture or be condescending, but America really needs to change the way it views the significance and importance of Memorial Day.

My next thought belongs to the #59. Now, I've only been in Israel for about 2.5 years, and America has been in existence for well over 200 years, but I can't believe that Israel is already 59. Rabbi Berkovits has said that the proof of the presence of G-d in history is in the state of Israel. How true that is! How can you not believe that or not believe in miracles when you look at what Israel has been through and survived in its young history. Yesterday, as I look over the whole of the north, being able to see all the way from the Mediterranean to the Golan from where I sat celebrating that we Jews have a home that we can finally call our own, I have never believed it more. This especially given after what we've experienced over the past 2 years. Next year's 60th birthday is going to be such a huge blow-out party. Here's to Israel's existence!!! As a huge side note, this year is also the 40th anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem. You don't even wanna know what the official name is. It's about 2 lines long. It's going to be about a month's worth of a celebration leading up to Jerusalem Day, so that's awesome. READ THE REST...

My next thought was actually about my brother and Michael Levin. Michael Levin was a Paratroop soldier that died in this past summer's war. He was an American Oleh, whose dream was to make Aliyah and fight in the Israeli Army. He was actually on vacation when the war broke out and broke it short in order to come back to Israel to fight. He considered it an HONOR, not an obligation or burden, to fight in Israel and for the Jewish people. On Yom Hazikaron, we were watching an excellent documentary about him, called "My son is a hero in Heaven". All I kept thinking about was how big of an a-hole my brother was. You see, my brother is not happy I made Aliyah. He thinks I was coerced and manipulated into my decision, and that, as an American, there's no possible way I could be happy with making Aliyah since I've supposedly "give up so much to be here". The "giving up the good life" is the most oft used excuse given to justify why American Jews don't make Aliyah. They can't get out of the scewed perception that Israel is NOT a third world country. In any case, here is my brother, a modern orthodox Jew, he gives money to Israel during the appeals at shul, and he's sending his children to supposedly pro-Zionist schools, and he goes to the Young Israel shul in his neighborhood. Yet, he is trying his best and has been since I got on the plane to come here, to talk me out of my decision and berate me for what I've done. Yes, sacrifices have been made, but none of them have been material. I miss my family and haven't been able to see them since my wedding almost 2 years ago. I haven't seen my brother since I made Aliyah almost 3 years ago. That's been because of school and work, not because of monetary issues. I have a niece that I haven't met yet. So, yes, that makes me sad some times, but I have never once regretted my decision. As a Jew, how can I? Here is this guy, Michael, who also left his family behind to come to Israel, to come home, to fight for his people. He was as selfless as they come, and he saw the bigger picture for the Jewish people. He said the redemption of the Jewish people is going to happen in Israel, and he wants to be involved to get it started. Again, he was HONORED to put his life on the line for Israel; for the state and the nation. Then, there's my brother. He can't see past the end of his nose, past the end of his own selfishness to what I'm doing, to the bigger picture. Several other of my family members, including my own parents, want to make Aliyah also, and my brother has done his best to talk them out of it and then blaming me for their decisions to come. Now, I'm not the reason they want to come, but if I'm a catalyst to my family making Aliyah, I HAVE NOTHING TO BE ASHAMED OF! For the past 2.5 years, my brother has done nothing but try to make me feel guilty and stupid for my decision. He is the one who should be ashamed of himself. Sorry, just venting there.

Here's my next thought. It has nothing to do with the best 2 days of festivities. The husband and I are going to be, in the near future, building our home. While not very popular in the States, in Israel it is very common to build homes from scratch. What Israel does have in common with America when it comes to house building and renovations is the crookedness of home contractors. We were talking with some building who built and renovated their homes, and they talked about all the other people you need to hire to make sure the contractor isn't cheating you. So, I asked if there are any honest contractors. They said that there is no such thing. This has got to be one of the only professions where you know you're hiring a thief. The only comparable professions are considered to be auto mechanics, plumbers, and electricians. Except, with the former, if you get a guy that was highly recommended by word of mouth, you can be almost sure they're honest. But, with contractors, that's not the case. If you're not around, if you have no-one there to supervise him, he WILL CHEAT YOU. I couldn't believe. It disgusts me, but there's nothing you can do. You can't not have a contractor building your home. So, it's worth it to spend the extra money at the beginning for an architect and building supervisor, so you don't have to spend the money later to fix all the mistakes the contractor made. Sickening.

My final thought is YouTube. I have been struck down by the fascists at YouTube. As many of you know, I've been making videos since last summer's war. I made videos chronicling the brave soldiers that fought and died in the war. I also made a video chronicling Holocaust denial in the Middle East. I have been censoring people. When a comment has been posted that has been factually incorrect and/or anti-semitic, I've taken the comment down and blocked the poster from being able to comment again. Apparently, I pist some people off, because YouTube SUDDENLY AND WITHOUT WARNING shut off my account. No particular reason was given, except all the possibilities that could have contributed to the cancellation of my account. So, while the Jihadi and Hezbollah propaganda and recruiting videos remain safely on the site, while anti-semitic Holocaust denial and anti-Israel videos are still playing, my videos have been struck down. It happened to the website, Hot Air, and now it has happened to me. Well, they're not shutting me down. My videos will go up in another format. I'll keep you updated to let you know where they'll be showing up next. I suggest a boycott of YouTube. Is any-one else interested? Has anybody else out there had this happened to them? Let me know.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Independence+Day, Yom+HaZikaron, Yom+Haatzmaut, Memorial, Day, Hezbollah, YouTube, Hot+Air, Jerusalem, Holocaust

Yom HaZikaron

2007-04-22T19:06:00.000+03:00

In commemoration of the Day of Remembrance for our fallen soldiers and subsequent celebration of 59 years of statehood, which we owe to those that have died to make sure we had a safe country to live in, there will be no posting until Wednesday. Please take a moment to think of our beloved soldiers.

Translation:
"The nation of Israel will remember its sons and daughters,
The faithful and the brave, the soldiers of the Israeli Defense Forces,
And all the underground fighters, and the brigades of fighters
In the battles of the people, and all the people of the intelligence community,
And security the people of the police which risked their souls
In the war of the revival of Israel,
And each one that has been murdered in the land and outside of it
By the hands of murderers from terrorist organizations.

Israel will remember and will be blessed in its seed and will eat on the brightness of the young
And the delight of the valor and the sanctity of the will and the self sacrifice of those that gave their lives in the hard battle."

Technorati Tags: Israel, Yom+HaZikaron, Memorial+Day, Soldier, IDF, War, Terrorist

VTech Shooter Fit Profile of Assassin

2007-04-19T15:33:00.000+03:00

The point of this post is to discuss how, as usual, in hindsight, those who saw the signals and signs of a very disturbed sign should have dealt with it in a more urgent manner. How a judge's report that Cho was an imminent danger to himself and others didn't make it into his record, so that he couldn't purchase a gun is beyond me. Virginia has issues, and this is just one among many. Virginia is also one of the states that REFUSES to pass Jessica's Law that would result in a minimum prison sentence for pedophiles and predators that sexually molest or rape children under 12 or are repeat offenders. But, let's not kid ourselves here. All those partisans that have turned this horrific massacre into a gun control issue are missing the point. Yes, Virginia should have more responsible gun control laws, but the type of person Cho was dictated that no matter how stringent the gun laws were, he would have find a way to get them. Had the judge's report been put into the system and Cho denied a hand-gun, he would have found a way to procure a weapon. If necessary, as we saw from the pictures, he would have used other weapons to carry out his plan. Yes, people, he was that determined. This was premeditated and coldly plotted. He was going to do anything to carry out his plan. So, seriously, while gun control discussions are relevant, they completely miss the point of what happened and are just disgusting exploitations of the dead.

As happened with the "Flying Imams", America is once again told to turn a blind eye to the symptoms of the problem. The concept of "If you see something suspicious, report it" is being challenged and ignored in this case as well. Other college students knew something was up and didn't report it. Teachers knew this kid was a problem and didn't think to go the extra distance. A judge saw there was imminent danger, but for some wild reason, this report didn't find its way into the police's hands. As disasters go, this was a series of events that led to a tragedy. As we look at the profile of a murderer, I'll comment on how they fit in with the evidence so far presented on Cho's character. It's eerily scary. Why? Because as you wonder how some-one could do this or why; that somehow this person's actions are unique and unpredictable, they actually fit very well with the characteristics of the assassin. The press is defining him as a madman or a psycho, but that's detrimental to understanding him. By putting him in those terms, he becomes almost like a comic book character. It's almost as if he isn't a real person. It trivializes his actions. But, he was very real and very very much in control of his actions. A madman is not in control of his actions. He's not responsible for what he does. Cho knew exactly what he was doing, and he CHOSE to commit these actions. He was NOT a madman. He was far more 3 dimensional than that.

I warn the readers that this analysis will be cold and may at times become graphic. Reader discretion is advised. READ THE REST...

When studying profiling and Forensic Psychology, the most famous name you will hear about is John Douglas, the FBI agent who created the profiling methodologies and revolutionized criminal behavioral science around the world. The book we will be using to analyze Cho is called "The Anatomy of Motive", by John Douglas and his associate, Mark Olshaker. Specifically, we will be using the chapter entitled Shadow of a Gunman. Studying past assassins, like school shooter dubbed "the sniper in the tower", Charles Whitman, we can develop the patterns of these types of characters.

Charles Whitman was a former Marine who, on August 1, 1996, went to the top of a clock tower of the University of Texas at Austin and randomly shot 13 students and faculty along with his own wife and mother before-hand. Let's see who we're dealing with here:
"Assassin personalities tend to be white male loners with self-esteem problems - no surprises there, since that describes a huge chunk of the violent predator population. More specifically, they tend to be functional paranoiacs. They shouldn't be confused with paranoid schizophrenics, who have a serious psychosis often described as shattered personality. The people we're dealing with may be delusional, but they're not hallucinatory. Rather, their paranoia may be described as a highly organized or methodical delusional system... In other words, if you accept the basic (but delusional) premise that everyone is out to get a particular individual and is ready and able to do harm, then it becomes a convincing argument that this individual should strike out and neutralize these enemies before they can act against him.
Sometime the delusional system will be based on a kernel of truth, but there will be no correlation between the defined problem and the action taken to deal with it."

How does this apply to Cho? Well, Cho was not a white male, but he was a male loner in his twenties with very apparent severe self-esteem problems. But, not just regular self-esteem problems. No, he was overtly arrogant and "hoity" to his teachers while displaying his low self-esteem. His teachers were able to see right through this. He stuck to himself and didn't talk to any-one. His delusion was obvious; girls or perceived "rich girls" or "brats" that rebuffed his supposed attention and admiration. The kernel of truth probably lies in the two girls that put a restraining order out against him. He may have seen his attention towards them as a natural way to show affection and to say that he liked them. When the restraining orders came out, it just reinforced his opinion that it wasn't that he had done something wrong, but they saw themselves as too good for him, and that all the "rich kids" on campus were out to get him, and they all thought they were better than him. On the tapes that were released yesterday, this becomes even more apparent. He keeps saying "YOU did this", "YOU pushed me into a corner", "YOU tortured me on purpose, for your own sick little game", "YOUR Mercedes and gold bracelets weren't good enough for you. You had to torture me as well and stomp callously on my heart". All fault is projected on this seen aggressor. Finally, we see how the action has nothing to do with the perceived truth. He did NOT gun down only women. He spread out his wrath between women, men, and even older teachers.

Like serial killers, the assassin usually comes from a troubled childhood. However, since we know nothing, as of yet, about Cho's childhood, we can't comment about that here.

Moving on:
Assassins try to "compensate for what they see, either consciously or subconsciously, as their emotional shortcomings... One of the most common way, as you might suspect, if gun fetishism... they begin to stockpile weapons and ammunition. [ed. note: While it is still unknown whether Cho had more guns than the 2 he used in the shooting, it was found that he had more that 320 rounds of ammunition stored in his car. They haven't even thoroughly investigated his dorm room or house yet. It would not be surprising if more was found.] "The gun is a means of empowering this inadequate personality, ensuring them that when they want to, they can attain our three old standbys of manipulation, domination, and control".

The pictures that Cho sent to NBC are very telling. The way he's wielding and even posing with the guns show that this is true. It is clear that he felt empowered by his weapons, and for the first time in his life, probably felt a sense of control and dominance.

"Another telling characteristic is the way assassins tend to express themselves. A very large number of them will keep diaries or journals, recording not just events that happened or the way they're feeling on a particular day as most people would, but also every slight done to them and imagined conspiracies, as well as detailed plans for what to do about them. Since they don't have any close friends or trusted confidantes, these social isolates express themselves to themselves in these detailed secret communications. In many cases, they actually use this journal writing to program themselves to commit the crime."

One doesn't have to be a genius to see how startlingly true this is in Cho's case. His room-mate and those who knew him have stated that they never saw him with friends or talking to anybody, but they did see him constantly writing. In their words, he was writing all the time and in almost every minute of his free time. He wrote plays and poems detailing the violence that he wanted to commit. The 23 page manifesto and hours long video he recorded is also ripe with this fact, pointing to perceived aggressors who were responsible for his feelings and actions. Ramblings to us were not ramblings to him. (That point should be driven home. We might not be able to see what he said or did as rational, but they were VERY rational to him.) They were mere precise repetitions of the same words. "You did this to me, and now I'm going to get you back." The video is just a 21st century version of the diary. In the end, he wants people to know why he was doing it, believing in his delusional mind that finally those at fault will realize the extent of their crimes. He wanted people to see him and know why he did what he did also for the reason that like assassins before him, "...he figured out a way to do something spectacular."

The next point we will go through goes into why Cho mentioned the Columbine shooters, spoke in some Jihadist language, signed his mail Ismail Ax, and, most importantly, likened himself to the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
"I think this seemingly silly anomaly is tremendously significant, because what he's essentially saying is, 'I don't belong here with all the wealthy, important people who park here and then go fly on airplanes. I'm just a grain of sand on the beach. I'm not as worthy as anyone else. I'm just an inadequate nobody, and the only way I can become important is by some great act that affects all these important people'.... And finally he goes on to wrap his mission in the trappings of a cause, saying this is a 'job I feel has to be done for mankind'... But here is the point I want to make: ... I can conceive of rare instances in which there might be a higher, even altruistic purpose... No matter who we look at, we're going to find an individual - overwhelmingly, a white male in his twenties - who does not feel good about himself and never has. In some way, he sees the violent act as the solution to his problem.... The cause was a convenient justification."

In one of the videos, Cho likens himself to Jesus Christ, dying for those that are just like him, so the world can see what kind of people "YOU" are. He relates his admiration for "martyrs" like the Columbine shooters and does mention certain Jihadist principles. There are those that have been wondering whether Cho had actually become a Jihdist since there are supposedly also references to the 9/11 hijackers. Don't jump to the wrong conclusion. It is more than likely that he is not a "practicing" Jihadist. In many ways, he is a poser. With his personality type, he will cling to those that he sees as either sympathetic to his "cause" or as superior and strong characters. He's an admirer and believes that he is just as "great" as those that came before him that committed deeds just like his. This is just a pathetic attempt to boost up his meager personality. "I am special. In death, I will achieve the glory that I could never achieve in life. YOU will finally see me for who I really am; a Jesus like martyr." In another video clip, he asks the "YOU" whether they had ever experienced torturous acts like having their throat slit, garbage shoved down their throat, being burned alive, etc. He then says that they had never experienced any sort of pain or misery. Of course, Cho is alive, so he's never experienced having his throat slit from ear to ear either. Whether he was being metaphoric of literal, he is once again trying to put the blame and justifications for his actions onto "YOU". "YOU have never experienced pain". Basically, saying "I have experienced torturous pain at your expense". So, please, dispel any Islamic conspiracy theories for this guy. It's not warranted. His "mission" had no ideological or political purposes. He was out to "avenge his tortured soul" and create worth in his life. People have also asked how he could be so cool and calm when he committed his crimes. Well, that's easy. "Once they decide on their course of action, stress and conflict are lifted."

Listen, I understand the need to make some sense out of this, and the mere fact that people are talking about gun control is just another way to place meaning and blame onto senseless death. But, unfortunately, it completely misses the point. As I will say over and over again, the United States' culture is in very bad straits because no-one is expected to be held accountable for their actions. Are we not responsible for the choices we make?!? No, unfortunately today, everyone is quick to point to finger at some other variable; anything other than the perpetrator's CHOICE to commit a horrific act because they can't conceive of it. No, for them, it must have been something else, because no-one in their right mind would commit such a heinous act. The Columbine shooters: It wasn't the kids' faults. It was the MUSIC they listened to. Cho: Well, he was a madman and a psycho, AND we need stiffer gun control laws. If we had stiffer gun control laws, this would never have happened. Again, taking the responsibility out of the perpetrator's hands and putting it on an outside force. We can't blame Cho. It's not his fault he could get a gun. Well, people, he posed in those pictures with weapons other than a gun. He also posed with a hunting knife and two hammers. Do you honestly believe for one second that had he not been able to get a gun, he wouldn't have resulted to the knife or the hammers to carry out his crime?!? He might not have been able to kill so many people, but he would have killed none-the-less. Make no mistakes about that. It's sad and pathetic that people are so quick and willing to divert attention from the real crime and sadness of the event in order to make political statements and make some political points. If we really want to prevent this type of thing from happening, we have to do a couple of things. First, we have to wake up as a society and stand firm on the principle that people have to take responsibility for their own actions and be held accountable for their choices. We need to teach our children that they have a personal responsibility to protect themselves and not wait for others to do so. Secondly, we have to have to help those that need it, and colleges need to a better job at protecting the students, the children that their parents entrust to the school to keep safe. Cho was deemed an IMMINENT danger to himself and others. How in the world was he allowed back on campus with 25,000 other students that he could potentially harm?!? The answers to the thousands of questions will eventually come, but one answer is for sure.

Obviously, in a very sick way, Cho achieved his goal. His name will never be forgotten, and he will live forever in annals of American history. However, he will go down as a pathetic loser who CHOSE to kill others to bring meaning to his life. He didn't count on others being heroes that day. He will only be remembered alongside people like Prof. Liviu Librescu, who gave his life to save his students.

Technorati Tags: Virginian, Tech, Massacre, Profile, Cho, Librescu, VTech, Assassin

What Has Really Happened To Israel's "People's Army"?

2007-04-19T14:19:00.000+03:00

Civilianization of the IDF
Written by Elliot Chodoff and Yisrael Ne’eman
Thursday, 19 April 2007

Over the past few years one of the greatest security threats to the State of Israel has been the civilianization of the IDF and military thinking. This process did not begin with the appointment of Defense Minister Amir Peretz in 2006, but dates to the early 1990s. In that decade the misplaced euphoria of Oslo led many to believe that universal regular military service as well as frequent reserve duty would be something of the past. After all the Palestinians would soon be Israel’s friends, if not allies, and if there arose a military challenge the air force, the standing army and commandos would handle everything. On the level of continued participation and integration within Israeli society the army was to be marginalized. Calls for a reorganization of the IDF as an all volunteer force (AVF) grew as it came to be believed that professionals would be the backbone of the IDF; reserve manpower was to be gradually eliminated in its entirety.

Civilianization of the Israeli military has manifested itself in a number of ways. Efficiency has been chosen to replace effectiveness as a measure of success; humanism has become a priority value, making casualties unacceptable in training and combat operations; management rather than command principles have come to direct the IDF elites in routine and crisis decision making; the reserves have been allowed to deteriorate, weakening the IDF’s connection to the civilian society while depriving the system of experienced combat troops; parental involvement in soldiers’ training and service has led commanders to further dilute training and discipline; and over-reliance on high technology has led to a command level alienation from the battlefield and the forces engaged with the enemy.

The fact that the IDF has not engaged in regular warfare since the summer of 1982 has had a profound effect on its organizational behavior. In the absence of direct measures of combat performance, the military has come to rely on civilian organizational models to assess its readiness. Measures of efficiency have come to replace combat effectiveness. The result has been a drive toward greater organizational efficiency at the price of achieving combat objectives. READ THE REST...

By the end of the nineties continuing attacks by the Hezbollah into the Israeli controlled south Lebanese security zone led to the establishment of the Four Mothers movement, a grass roots organization that demanded Israel’s immediate unilateral withdrawal from Lebanon to the international border. The Four Mothers and their supporters “reasoned” that if you do not attack your enemy, he will not attack you. The movement, built on the logic that if the IDF were removed from Lebanon there would be no further casualties in that country, was instrumental in the formulation of Ehud Barak’s policy of total withdrawal from Lebanon.

Israeli society also entered an era in which humanism was taken to its ultimate goal of individual human rights, whereby a soldier’s life was as important as that of a civilian.

Lastly, over the past decade or so Israel’s high tech success was grafted on to the military. The dream had been achieved, and the IDF would now operate in a fully managed high tech push button computer warfare environment utilizing the latest technological advances, including plasma television screens in air conditioned tents.

Training efficiency has been defined in terms of zero training accidents. This has been extrapolated to zero combat casualties. Training has become unrealistically sterile with little resemblance to the realities of the battlefield. Combat operations have devolved into casualty evacuation operations as soon as the first soldier has been wounded. While an extremely low casualty count may be a component of low intensity conflict (LIC) doctrine, it has no place on the regular battlefield. “Acceptable losses” mean minimum casualties within the framework of the mission and objectives, not a zero casualty expectation. The mission is to achieve the military objective at minimum cost and not the reverse.

There has been a gradual shift away from the IDF’s tradition as a mass, “people’s army” to a smaller, high tech force. This shift is rooted in the belief that peace with Israel’s neighbors is imminent, and even if there will be violent conflict in the future, it will be of a limited nature, requiring the engagement of only air and special ground forces.

The IDF has reached the point that it is only one step short of being an all volunteer force. Today, exemptions from service are relatively easy to obtain, whether categorical (full-time yeshiva student) or personal (mental or physical disability). Furthermore, it requires little effort for a recruit to opt out of combat service. This phenomenon is true in the regular army, and even more evident in the reserve component of the IDF.

In recent years, the reserve component of the IDF was allowed to deteriorate and decay, in the mistaken belief that they would no longer be needed to defend the country. Reserve troops’ training and equipment declined in quality and quantity, as perennial defense budget cuts forced the IDF to choose between high cost technology and the more mundane maintenance of the reserves. Within the ranks of IDF decision makers, the reserve corps took a back seat to the better placed and connected regular officer corps.

Today anyone serving in the reserves wants to be there, and reluctant reservists no longer exist. The IDF has come to understand that fewer, highly motivated reservists are preferable to a larger number who often avoid service or create more problems than they are worth.

What has been overlooked in the planned deterioration of the reserve corps is that the reservists add valuable civilian perspectives, concepts, and skills to the IDF’s planning and operations. When in civilian life they often use military thinking or techniques to succeed in their professional spheres. Most important, they still are the army’s best connection to the populace as they are part of civil society as a large part of the Israeli population is directly connected to the IDF; they understand military considerations and feel at home when in uniform. Furthermore, reserve officers and senior NCO’s often hold pivotal positions in the civilian sector, strengthening the link between the civilian society and the military.

Even if professionally run, once the reservists are forced out of the picture the army will become just another department in a civilian ministry (defense) to be used as sparingly as possible to reduce costs. Its professionals can be compared to civilian experts with “soldiering” defined as a job, gradually shifting the perception of military service from profession to occupation. The IDF will cease to be a people’s army representing the nation. The commitment of the average enlistee can be expected to drop considerably, as the military is not his chosen profession; in the end the professional soldiers will become bureaucrats and one will find very few bureaucrats willing to take the courageous steps necessary to fight and win a war.

The naïveté of the Four Mothers and their supporters bordered on fantasy yet their influence led to the total withdrawal of the IDF from Lebanon combined with demands that the army take no offensive action, even should Hezbollah fire across the border. Everyone should play it safe. We are speaking of the same period when parents’ committees were set up to defend soldiers’ civil rights and the average battalion commander spent 20% of his time dealing with parents complaints and inquiries about their sons instead of planning for the next war (which can be considered militaristic). True, soldiers should not be abused in the military as had been in several cases, but parents should not be directly involved should a soldier be punished with extra guard duty or docked leave time due to infractions or slovenly behavior. The combat officer corps became more worried about what parents would say or be reported in the press about their lack of civil behavior and neglected the need to instill in their soldiers the need to destroy the enemy in combat (yes, admittedly “politically incorrect”). And lest in be forgotten, a soldier is trained and meant to defend his country and its civilian population, not the opposite. No one wants him to sacrifice his life, but he is on the front lines and is expected to endure the dangers of combat to ensure his nation’s security.

Finally we have the culture of hi-tech success. Just model the army after a computer or electro-optic firm in Tel Aviv and we can win, just like in the market place. All one needs is good managers. If wars are now managed, rather than commanded, then concepts such as “winning”, “crushing the enemy” or “going for total victory” will be replaced with management ideas of efficiency and satisfactory performance. One can manage a diplomatic offensive or an economic crisis but not a war, as the job of a general is to win a war, and not to be a combat “manager.” But speaking in “politically correct” civilian terms is more palatable to those who would prefer to avoid reality.

The Four Mothers syndrome was characterized by overly optimistic dreams that were shattered by the rocket fire of Hezbollah, a Khomeinist organization dedicated to the destruction of the State of Israel and the enslavement of Jews in a second class citizenship role known as the “dhimma.” The leaders of the managerial army discovered that the war was beyond their control when certain critical parts of the battlefield were beyond the scope of their computer screens.

Words have meaning and those meanings are internalized by all. Armies are supposed to strive for victory, not satisfactory performance. The newly appointed Chief of Staff, Gabi Ashkenazi, is said to understand this. We certainly hope so.

Technorati Tags: Israel, IDF, Israel+Army, Ashkenazi, Oslo, Palestinian, Management, War, Lebanon

Israeli Professor And Holocaust Survivor Among Those Killed in VTech Massacre

2007-04-17T19:25:00.000+03:00

Professor Liviu Librescu wasn't just an educator, he was a hero. An Israeli and Holocaust survivor, Librescu taught Engineering Science & Mechanics and was renowned for his advancements in aeronautical engineering. He was killed while trying to protect and save his students. He tried to keep the class-room door closed as the gunman shot his way into the class-room. As the gunman, a VTech student Cho Seung-Hui, cocked his gun to start shooting the students, Librescu threw himself in front of the gun and was shot and killed as he gave his students precious time to escape through the second story windows.

What a selfless heroic act. I don't even know what to say. I think we should all take a moment of silence today to reflect and give honor and remembrance to those that were senselessly slaughtered yesterday.
Baruch Dayin He'Emet.

Israeli professor killed in US attack
By HAVIV RETTIG, JPOST.COM STAFF AND AP

As Jews worldwide honored on Monday the memory of those who were murdered in the Holocaust, a 76-year-old survivor sacrificed his life to save his students in Monday's shooting at Virginia Tech College that left 33 dead and over two dozen wounded.

Professor Liviu Librescu, 76, threw himself in front of the shooter when the man attempted to enter his classroom. The Israeli mechanics and engineering lecturer was shot to death, "but all the students lived - because of him," Virginia Tech student Asael Arad - also an Israeli - told Army Radio.

Several of Librescu's other students sent e-mails to his wife, Marlena, telling of how he blocked the gunman's way and saved their lives, said Librescu's son, Joe.
"My father blocked the doorway with his body and asked the students to flee," Joe Librescu said in a telephone interview from his home outside of Tel Aviv. "Students started opening windows and jumping out."

Librescu was respected in his field, his son said.

"His work was his life in a sense," said Joe. "That was a good place for him to practice his research."

Librescu was sent to a labor camp in Russia as a child and saved by the townspeople. His father was deported by the Nazis.

As a scientist working under Nicolae Ceaucescu's oppressive regime, Librescu was forbidden to have any contact with sources outside Romania. He defied the ban, continuing to publish scientific articles secretly.

His Zionist affinities eventually caused him to be forced out of his job. In 1978, the Librescus emigrated from Romania to Israel, where they raised two sons. In 1986, the family moved to Virginia for Librescu's sabbatical. While they only planned to stay in the United States a year, but have lived there ever since.

Librescu's second son, Arie, told The Jerusalem Post that his father had served as an "ambassador" for Israel in a community with many Muslim residents, but few Israelis.

The Foreign Ministry has taken charge of flying Librescu's body back to Israel. The funeral is expected to take place in Ra'anana on Thursday, although that date has not been confirmed.
[....]

Technorati Tags: Israel, Holocaust, Survivor, Liviu+Librescu, Virgina, Technology, VT, Virginia+Tech, Cho+Seung+Hui

Israel Is The Only State Directly Named By The UN As A Violator Of Women's Rights

2007-04-17T11:48:00.000+03:00

(Hat Tip: Giyus)
Yeah, I know. It would be extremely laughable if it weren't getting so pathetic and old already. At this year's annual meeting of the UN on the matter of women's rights, Israel was the ONLY state or country directly named as being a violator; not of Israeli women mind you. No, of course not. But, rather of PALESTINIAN WOMEN. The rest of the meeting dealt with vague topics like female genital mutilation and forced marriage, but NO OTHER country was named as a culprit of having committed these crimes. No, the Israeli "occupation" is the reason that the progress and advancement of Palestinian women are being stifled. No mention of "honor killings" being committed against Palestinian women by PALESTINIAN MEN being a reason in this, or even as a VIOLATION of women's rights. No mention of the oppression of Palestinian women by PALESTINIAN MEN being the reason, or even as a VIOLATION of women's rights. No mention of Palestinian women being used as TERRORISTS and SUICIDE BOMBERS by PALESTINIAN terrorist organizations, even MOTHERS and GRAND MOTHERS, as being the reason, or even as a VIOLATION of women's rights. Wait, nix the last one. Many Western feminist organizations say that women volunteering to blow themselves up amongst innocent civilians are a HUGE step FORWARD in women's rights in the Middle East. READ THE REST...

Nope, it's all because of the "occupation". The Palestinian Authority bears no responsibility in the degradation of Palestinian women even though no economic infrastructure has been created for the Palestinian women to work in. No, the only jobs available are government jobs, and the only real paying jobs available within those government positions are "security". The women aint allowed to play there. They can only volunteer for "martyrdom" missions. They're not allowed to actually work with the men to "serve and protect". Yeah, it's all because of the "occupation". It's so old already. It's so pathetic. I expect the next UN report on Global Warming and Climate Change to have a clause in there that blames the whole thing on Israel and the "occupation". If only the "occupation" were to stop, then no-one would pollute or drive SUVs anymore. By the way, I suggest you actually read the draft to really grasp the absurdity of the whole thing.

Women's Rights at the UN: Israel as the Only Violator, Anne Bayefsky

Last Friday, March 9, 2007 the UN wrapped up its annual session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women. Guess where they found a violation of women's rights? Among the hundreds of thousands of women who are dead, dying, mutilated, displaced or raped in Sudan? Among the million female migrant workers cowering in the basements of Saudi Arabian villas from the taskmasters who stole their passports the minute they got off the plane? Among the women stoned and hanged for "adultery" in Iran? The millions of women forcibly aborted in China? The thousands murdered or forced to commit suicide for the crime of "dishonoring" their fathers and brothers across the Arab and Muslim world?

If you guessed "none of the above," then you'll enjoy coming on down to the UN. The UN's lead body charged with promoting and protecting women's rights identifies only one state as violating the rights of women in the world today – Israel.(Violating the rights of Palestinian women.) The vote was 40 for and 2 against (the United States and Canada).

Germany, on behalf of the European Union, gave a one minute "explanation" excusing its affirmative vote. It said: "we express our deep concerns for the impact on all women in the region including the Israeli women" – although Germany did not insist such language be inserted in the resolution itself. For 60 seconds, the representative of the country where millions of Jewish women and girls were murdered en masse not so long ago took notice of the Jewish mothers and daughters who have fallen victim to terrorism in the Jewish state. This is the moral corruption that the UN breeds within democracies like Germany. In the United Nations, an institution owned and directed by the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the European Union grovels while the real abusers cheer.

Technorati Tags: Israel, UN, United+Nations, Women, Rights

Yom Ha'Shoa Upon Us Once Again

2007-04-15T17:07:00.000+03:00

For the past couple of years when Yom Ha'Shoa dawns upon Israel, I've written about why it's so important to have a separate day to commemorate the systematic extermination of the Jewish people by the Nazi regime. For some reason, this argument has always managed to stir up a hornet's net of debate around the blogosphere. Honestly, I don't understand why, but I digress. Debate, when done in good and fair taste, is always a good thing. Well, I'm going to change tracks this year. I'm not going to write about why this day is so important. No, if you want to know why I think that, you can read my previous articles. No, this year, I'm just going to leave you with a simple video that is part of a series that I am doing. The subject is Holocaust Denial in the Middle East. It's a simple formula. Claim that either the Holocaust never happened or that the numbers were exaggerated or that the Zionists were behind the relocation of the Jews so as to get them to come to Palestine. Then, talk about Israel is perpetrating the REAL Holocaust against the Palestinians, but that the world is simply ignoring this horror out of regret and guilt of the so called Jewish Holocaust. It's already working. Britain's department of Education has discovered that schools across the country are beginning to cancel their Holocaust and Crusader History classes out of FEAR of their Muslim pupils and out of FEAR that the teachers will clash with the teaching of the Mosques. This is because the Mosques are teaching these children that the Holocaust NEVER HAPPENED. Instead of countering this horrific education, the British educators are giving in, OUT OF FEAR, and reinforcing this denial teaching by not bothering to even teach the children and correct their ill informed minds. Well, if the schools aren't teaching about the Holocaust then of course these children will just believe what the Mosques are saying. It never happened...

Watch it, and then tell me whether it's important or not to have a separate day to force the world to remember what they allowed to happen. I won't be writing again until tomorrow night. I hope everyone, whether they agree with this day or not, has a meaning Holocaust Memorial Day. When we say NEVER AGAIN!, I hope this year we actually meant it.

Technorati Tags: Holocaust, Memorial, Day, Jew, Jewish, Muslim, Mosque, Middle+East, Great, Britain